Nicholas Hoernle

Nicholas Hoernle, Rafael Michael Karampatsis, Vaishak Belle et al.

We propose a novel way to incorporate expert knowledge into the training of deep neural networks. Many approaches encode domain constraints directly into the network architecture, requiring non-trivial or domain-specific engineering. In contrast, our approach, called MultiplexNet, represents domain knowledge as a logical formula in disjunctive normal form (DNF) which is easy to encode and to elicit from human experts. It introduces a Categorical latent variable that learns to choose which constraint term optimizes the error function of the network and it compiles the constraints directly into the output of existing learning algorithms. We demonstrate the efficacy of this approach empirically on several classical deep learning tasks, such as density estimation and classification in both supervised and unsupervised settings where prior knowledge about the domains was expressed as logical constraints. Our results show that the MultiplexNet approach learned to approximate unknown distributions well, often requiring fewer data samples than the alternative approaches. In some cases, MultiplexNet finds better solutions than the baselines; or solutions that could not be achieved with the alternative approaches. Our contribution is in encoding domain knowledge in a way that facilitates inference that is shown to be both efficient and general; and critically, our approach guarantees 100% constraint satisfaction in a network's output.

Nicholas Hoernle, Gregory Kehne, Ariel D. Procaccia et al.

Badges are commonly used in online platforms as incentives for promoting contributions. It is widely accepted that badges "steer" people's behavior toward increasing their rate of contributions before obtaining the badge. This paper provides a new probabilistic model of user behavior in the presence of badges. By applying the model to data from thousands of users on the Q&A site Stack Overflow, we find that steering is not as widely applicable as was previously understood. Rather, the majority of users remain apathetic toward badges, while still providing a substantial number of contributions to the site. An interesting statistical phenomenon, termed "Phantom Steering," accounts for the interaction data of these users and this may have contributed to some previous conclusions about steering. Our results suggest that a small population, approximately 20%, of users respond to the badge incentives. Moreover, we conduct a qualitative survey of the users on Stack Overflow which provides further evidence that the insights from the model reflect the true behavior of the community. We argue that while badges might contribute toward a suite of effective rewards in an online system, research into other aspects of reward systems such as Stack Overflow reputation points should become a focus of the community.

Nicholas Hoernle, Kobi Gal, Barbara Grosz et al.

This paper describes methods for comparative evaluation of the interpretability of models of high dimensional time series data inferred by unsupervised machine learning algorithms. The time series data used in this investigation were logs from an immersive simulation like those commonly used in education and healthcare training. The structures learnt by the models provide representations of participants' activities in the simulation which are intended to be meaningful to people's interpretation. To choose the model that induces the best representation, we designed two interpretability tests, each of which evaluates the extent to which a model's output aligns with people's expectations or intuitions of what has occurred in the simulation. We compared the performance of the models on these interpretability tests to their performance on statistical information criteria. We show that the models that optimize interpretability quality differ from those that optimize (statistical) information theoretic criteria. Furthermore, we found that a model using a fully Bayesian approach performed well on both the statistical and human-interpretability measures. The Bayesian approach is a good candidate for fully automated model selection, i.e., when direct empirical investigations of interpretability are costly or infeasible.