Terence Parr

Terence Parr, James D. Wilson, Jeff Hamrick

Practitioners use feature importance to rank and eliminate weak predictors during model development in an effort to simplify models and improve generality. Unfortunately, they also routinely conflate such feature importance measures with feature impact, the isolated effect of an explanatory variable on the response variable. This can lead to real-world consequences when importance is inappropriately interpreted as impact for business or medical insight purposes. The dominant approach for computing importances is through interrogation of a fitted model, which works well for feature selection, but gives distorted measures of feature impact. The same method applied to the same data set can yield different feature importances, depending on the model, leading us to conclude that impact should be computed directly from the data. While there are nonparametric feature selection algorithms, they typically provide feature rankings, rather than measures of impact or importance. They also typically focus on single-variable associations with the response. In this paper, we give mathematical definitions of feature impact and importance, derived from partial dependence curves, that operate directly on the data. To assess quality, we show that features ranked by these definitions are competitive with existing feature selection techniques using three real data sets for predictive tasks.

Terence Parr, James D. Wilson

Partial dependence curves (FPD) introduced by Friedman, are an important model interpretation tool, but are often not accessible to business analysts and scientists who typically lack the skills to choose, tune, and assess machine learning models. It is also common for the same partial dependence algorithm on the same data to give meaningfully different curves for different models, which calls into question their precision. Expertise is required to distinguish between model artifacts and true relationships in the data. In this paper, we contribute methods for computing partial dependence curves, for both numerical (StratPD) and categorical explanatory variables (CatStratPD), that work directly from training data rather than predictions of a model. Our methods provide a direct estimate of partial dependence, and rely on approximating the partial derivative of an unknown regression function without first fitting a model and then approximating its partial derivative. We investigate settings where contemporary partial dependence methods---including FPD, ALE, and SHAP methods---give biased results. Furthermore, we demonstrate that our approach works correctly on synthetic and plausibly on real data sets. Our goal is not to argue that model-based techniques are not useful. Rather, we hope to open a new line of inquiry into nonparametric partial dependence.

Terence Parr, Jeremy Howard

This paper is an attempt to explain all the matrix calculus you need in order to understand the training of deep neural networks. We assume no math knowledge beyond what you learned in calculus 1, and provide links to help you refresh the necessary math where needed. Note that you do not need to understand this material before you start learning to train and use deep learning in practice; rather, this material is for those who are already familiar with the basics of neural networks, and wish to deepen their understanding of the underlying math. Don't worry if you get stuck at some point along the way---just go back and reread the previous section, and try writing down and working through some examples. And if you're still stuck, we're happy to answer your questions in the Theory category at forums.fast.ai. Note: There is a reference section at the end of the paper summarizing all the key matrix calculus rules and terminology discussed here. See related articles at http://explained.ai

Terence Parr, Jurgin Vinju

There are many declarative frameworks that allow us to implement code formatters relatively easily for any specific language, but constructing them is cumbersome. The first problem is that "everybody" wants to format their code differently, leading to either many formatter variants or a ridiculous number of configuration options. Second, the size of each implementation scales with a language's grammar size, leading to hundreds of rules. In this paper, we solve the formatter construction problem using a novel approach, one that automatically derives formatters for any given language without intervention from a language expert. We introduce a code formatter called CodeBuff that uses machine learning to abstract formatting rules from a representative corpus, using a carefully designed feature set. Our experiments on Java, SQL, and ANTLR grammars show that CodeBuff is efficient, has excellent accuracy, and is grammar invariant for a given language. It also generalizes to a 4th language tested during manuscript preparation.