journal article·2022-09-23Open access

Robustness, Stability, and Fidelity of Explanations for a Deep Skin Cancer Classification Model

Mirka Saarela, Lilia Geogieva

Applied Sciences· Volume 12· Issue 19

Abstract

Skin cancer is one of the most prevalent of all cancers. Because of its being widespread and externally observable, there is a potential that machine learning models integrated into artificial intelligence systems will allow self-screening and automatic analysis in the future. Especially, the recent success of various deep machine learning models shows promise that, in the future, patients could self-analyse their external signs of skin cancer by uploading pictures of these signs to an artificial intelligence system, which runs such a deep learning model and returns the classification results. However, both patients and dermatologists, who might use such a system to aid their work, need to know why the system has made a particular decision. Recently, several explanation techniques for the deep learning algorithm’s decision-making process have been introduced. This study compares two popular local explanation techniques (integrated gradients and local model-agnostic explanations) for image data on top of a well-performing (80% accuracy) deep learning algorithm trained on the HAM10000 dataset, a large public collection of dermatoscopic images. Our results show that both methods have full local fidelity. However, the integrated gradients explanations perform better with regard to quantitative evaluation metrics (stability and robustness), while the model-agnostic method seem to provide more intuitive explanations. We conclude that there is still a long way before such automatic systems can be used reliably in practice.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: AI in cancer detection · Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management · Cell Image Analysis Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Faculty of Information Technology, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 Jyväskylä, Finland

School of Mathematical & Computer Sciences, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK

Funding

European Commission H2020—Research and Innovation programme

References (65)

Show source-provided references
1. Analysis of the ISIC image datasets: Usage, benchmarks and recommendations10.1016/j.media.2021.102305 ↗
2. Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks10.1038/nature21056 ↗
3. Holland, K. (2022, September 22). What Is a Dermatologist and How Can They Help You?. Healthline, Available online: https://www.healthline.com/find-care/articles/dermatologists/what-is-a-dermatologist.
4. Deep learning in medical image analysis10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071516-044442 ↗
5. Explainable skin lesion diagnosis using taxonomies10.1016/j.patcog.2020.107413 ↗
6. A convolutional neural network framework for accurate skin cancer detection10.1007/s11063-020-10364-y ↗
7. A convolutional neural network trained with dermoscopic images performed on par with 145 dermatologists in a clinical melanoma image classification task10.1016/j.ejca.2019.02.005 ↗
8. Human–computer collaboration for skin cancer recognition10.1038/s41591-020-0942-0 ↗
9. Skin cancer classification via convolutional neural networks: Systematic review of studies involving human experts10.1016/j.ejca.2021.06.049 ↗
10. Codella, N.C., Lin, C.C., Halpern, A., Hind, M., Feris, R., and Smith, J.R. (2018). Collaborative human-AI (CHAI): Evidence-based interpretable melanoma classification in dermoscopic images. Understanding and Interpreting Machine Learning in Medical Image Computing Applications, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-02628-8_11 ↗
11. Selvaraju, R.R., Cogswell, M., Das, A., Vedantam, R., Parikh, D., and Batra, D. (2017, January 22–29). Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Venice, Italy.10.1109/ICCV.2017.74 ↗
12. A benchmark for neural network robustness in skin cancer classification10.1016/j.ejca.2021.06.047 ↗
13. The HAM10000 dataset, a large collection of multi-source dermatoscopic images of common pigmented skin lesions10.1038/sdata.2018.161 ↗
14. Do as AI say: Susceptibility in deployment of clinical decision-aids10.1038/s41746-021-00385-9 ↗
15. Peeking inside the black-box: A survey on explainable artificial intelligence (XAI)10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2870052 ↗
16. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012 ↗
17. A survey of methods for explaining black box models10.1145/3236009 ↗
18. Explaining deep neural networks and beyond: A review of methods and applications10.1109/JPROC.2021.3060483 ↗
19. A survey on explainable artificial intelligence (XAI): Toward medical XAI10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3027314 ↗
20. Sundararajan, M., Taly, A., and Yan, Q. (2017, January 6–11). Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia.
21. Ribeiro, M.T., Singh, S., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). “Why Should I Trust You?”: Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/2939672.2939778 ↗
22. Comparison of feature importance measures as explanations for classification models10.1007/s42452-021-04148-9 ↗
23. Can we automate expert-based journal rankings? Analysis of the Finnish publication indicator
24. Attention residual learning for skin lesion classification10.1109/TMI.2019.2893944 ↗
25. Integrating patient data into skin cancer classification using convolutional neural networks: Systematic review10.2196/20708 ↗
26. Gulzar, Y., and Khan, S.A. (2022). Skin Lesion Segmentation Based on Vision Transformers and Convolutional Neural Networks—A Comparative Study. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12125990 ↗
27. An enhanced technique of skin cancer classification using deep convolutional neural network with transfer learning models
28. Multiclass skin cancer classification using EfficientNets—A first step towards preventing skin cancer10.1016/j.neuri.2021.100034 ↗
29. Ali, R., Hardie, R.C., Narayanan, B.N., and De Silva, S. (2019, January 15–19). Deep learning ensemble methods for skin lesion analysis towards melanoma detection. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE National Aerospace and Electronics Conference (NAECON), Dayton, OH, USA.10.1109/NAECON46414.2019.9058245 ↗
30. Alibi Explain: Algorithms for Explaining Machine Learning Models
31. Deep learning10.1038/nature14539 ↗
32. Deep learning: Methods and applications10.1561/2000000039 ↗
33. How convolutional neural network see the world-A survey of convolutional neural network visualization methods10.3934/mfc.2018008 ↗
34. Khan, S.A., Gulzar, Y., Turaev, S., and Peng, Y.S. (2021). A Modified HSIFT Descriptor for Medical Image Classification of Anatomy Objects. Symmetry, 13.10.3390/sym13111987 ↗
35. Application of the residue number system to reduce hardware costs of the convolutional neural network implementation10.1016/j.matcom.2020.04.031 ↗
36. Albawi, S., Mohammed, T.A., and Al-Zawi, S. (2017, January 21–23). Understanding of a convolutional neural network. Proceedings of the IEEE 2017 International Conference on Engineering and Technology (ICET), Antalya, Turkey.10.1109/ICEngTechnol.2017.8308186 ↗
37. Molnar, C. (2022). Interpretable Machine Learning: A Guide for Making Black Box Models Explainable, Lulu Press. [2nd ed.].
38. Carvalho, D.V., Pereira, E.M., and Cardoso, J.S. (2019). Machine learning interpretability: A survey on methods and metrics. Electronics, 8.10.3390/electronics8080832 ↗
39. Doshi-Velez, F., and Kim, B. (2017). Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. arXiv.
40. Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007 ↗
41. Koh, P.W., and Liang, P. (2017, January 6–11). Understanding black-box predictions via influence functions. Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia.
42. Representer point selection for explaining deep neural networks
43. Li, O., Liu, H., Chen, C., and Rudin, C. (2018, January 2–7). Deep Learning for Case-Based Reasoning through Prototypes: A Neural Network that Explains Its Predictions. Proceedings of the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11771 ↗
44. Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR
45. Visualizing higher-layer features of a deep network
46. Extracting refined rules from knowledge-based neural networks10.1007/BF00993103 ↗
47. Interpretation of artificial neural networks by means of fuzzy rules10.1109/72.977279 ↗
48. Neuro-fuzzy rule generation: Survey in soft computing framework10.1109/72.846746 ↗
49. All Models are Wrong, but Many are Useful: Learning a Variable’s Importance by Studying an Entire Class of Prediction Models Simultaneously
50. Fong, R.C., and Vedaldi, A. (2017, January 22–29). Interpretable explanations of black boxes by meaningful perturbation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Venice, Italy.10.1109/ICCV.2017.371 ↗
51. Zintgraf, L.M., Cohen, T.S., Adel, T., and Welling, M. (2017, January 24–26). Visualizing deep neural network decisions: Prediction difference analysis. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), Toulon, France.
52. Zeiler, M.D., and Fergus, R. (2014, January 6–12). Visualizing and understanding convolutional networks. Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision, Zurich, Switzerland.10.1007/978-3-319-10590-1_53 ↗
53. Wojtas, M., and Chen, K. (2020, January 6–12). Feature Importance Ranking for Deep Learning. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2020), Virtual.
54. A Survey on the Explainability of Supervised Machine Learning10.1613/jair.1.12228 ↗
55. Use of some sensitivity criteria for choosing networks with good generalization ability10.1007/BF02309007 ↗
56. Simonyan, K., Vedaldi, A., and Zisserman, A. (2013). Deep inside convolutional networks: Visualising image classification models and saliency maps. arXiv.
57. Shrikumar, A., Greenside, P., and Kundaje, A. (2017, January 6–11). Learning important features through propagating activation differences. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia.
58. Notions of explainability and evaluation approaches for explainable artificial intelligence10.1016/j.inffus.2021.05.009 ↗
59. Alvarez-Melis, D., and Jaakkola, T.S. (2018, January 10–15). On the robustness of interpretability methods. Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2018), Stockholm, Sweden.
60. Honegger, M. (2018). Shedding light on black box machine learning algorithms: Development of an axiomatic framework to assess the quality of methods that explain individual predictions. arXiv.
61. Predicting hospital associated disability from imbalanced data using supervised learning10.1016/j.artmed.2018.09.004 ↗
62. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
63. Dindorf, C., Konradi, J., Wolf, C., Taetz, B., Bleser, G., Huthwelker, J., Werthmann, F., Bartaguiz, E., Kniepert, J., and Drees, P. (2021). Classification and automated interpretation of spinal posture data using a pathology-independent classifier and explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). Sensors, 21.10.3390/s21186323 ↗
64. IMDRF SaMD Working Group (2017). Software as a Medical Device(SaMD): Clinical Evaluation—Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.
65. Ali, R., Hardie, R.C., Narayanan, B.N., and Kebede, T.M. (2022). IMNets: Deep Learning Using an Incremental Modular Network Synthesis Approach for Medical Imaging Applications. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12115500 ↗