Measuring AI explanation quality could help improve it, a user argues
The user credits a paper’s dataset and pipeline with producing more diverse and realistic test cases than prior work, and says models can be trained to better explain their behavior after the fact.
TLDR
A user backs “counterfactual simulatability” as a metric for explanation quality, arguing that having a measurable target makes improvement possible. They praise a paper’s dataset and pipeline for creating more diverse and realistic test cases than prior work, and highlight training models to produce better after-the-fact explanations of their behavior. In a follow-up, they say this paper and an earlier, more training-focused paper on the same topic used Tinker for fine-tuning experiments.
Combined views
4.6K
1 Source, first seen 26d ago