Adarsh Subbaswamy

Jean Feng, Adarsh Subbaswamy, Alexej Gossmann et al.

After a machine learning (ML)-based system is deployed, monitoring its performance is important to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the algorithm over time. When an ML algorithm interacts with its environment, the algorithm can affect the data-generating mechanism and be a major source of bias when evaluating its standalone performance, an issue known as performativity. Although prior work has shown how to validate models in the presence of performativity using causal inference techniques, there has been little work on how to monitor models in the presence of performativity. Unlike the setting of model validation, there is much less agreement on which performance metrics to monitor. Different monitoring criteria impact how interpretable the resulting test statistic is, what assumptions are needed for identifiability, and the speed of detection. When this choice is further coupled with the decision to use observational versus interventional data, ML deployment teams are faced with a multitude of monitoring options. The aim of this work is to highlight the relatively under-appreciated complexity of designing a monitoring strategy and how causal reasoning can provide a systematic framework for choosing between these options. As a motivating example, we consider an ML-based risk prediction algorithm for predicting unplanned readmissions. Bringing together tools from causal inference and statistical process control, we consider six monitoring procedures (three candidate monitoring criteria and two data sources) and investigate their operating characteristics in simulation studies. Results from this case study emphasize the seemingly simple (and obvious) fact that not all monitoring systems are created equal, which has real-world impacts on the design and documentation of ML monitoring systems.

Antonio Parziale, Monica Agrawal, Shalmali Joshi et al.

A collection of the extended abstracts that were presented at the 2nd Machine Learning for Health symposium (ML4H 2022), which was held both virtually and in person on November 28, 2022, in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. Machine Learning for Health (ML4H) is a longstanding venue for research into machine learning for health, including both theoretical works and applied works. ML4H 2022 featured two submission tracks: a proceedings track, which encompassed full-length submissions of technically mature and rigorous work, and an extended abstract track, which would accept less mature, but innovative research for discussion. All the manuscripts submitted to ML4H Symposium underwent a double-blind peer-review process. Extended abstracts included in this collection describe innovative machine learning research focused on relevant problems in health and biomedicine.

Rucha Deshpande, Tahsin Rahman, Miguel Lago et al.

Synthetic data provides a promising approach to address data scarcity for training machine learning models; however, adoption without proper quality assessments may introduce artifacts, distortions, and unrealistic features that compromise model performance and clinical utility. This work introduces a novel knowledge-based anomaly detection method for detecting network-induced shape artifacts in synthetic images. The introduced method utilizes a two-stage framework comprising (i) a novel feature extractor that constructs a specialized feature space by analyzing the per-image distribution of angle gradients along anatomical boundaries, and (ii) an isolation forest-based anomaly detector. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the method for identifying network-induced shape artifacts in two synthetic mammography datasets from models trained on CSAW-M and VinDr-Mammo patient datasets respectively. Quantitative evaluation shows that the method successfully concentrates artifacts in the most anomalous partition (1st percentile), with AUC values of 0.97 (CSAW-syn) and 0.91 (VMLO-syn). In addition, a reader study involving three imaging scientists confirmed that images identified by the method as containing network-induced shape artifacts were also flagged by human readers with mean agreement rates of 66% (CSAW-syn) and 68% (VMLO-syn) for the most anomalous partition, approximately 1.5-2 times higher than the least anomalous partition. Kendall-Tau correlations between algorithmic and human rankings were 0.45 and 0.43 for the two datasets, indicating reasonable agreement despite the challenging nature of subtle artifact detection. This method is a step forward in the responsible use of synthetic data, as it allows developers to evaluate synthetic images for known anatomic constraints and pinpoint and address specific issues to improve the overall quality of a synthetic dataset.

Nathan Drenkow, Mitchell Pavlak, Keith Harrigian et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is now firmly at the center of evidence-based medicine. Despite many success stories that edge the path of AI's rise in healthcare, there are comparably many reports of significant shortcomings and unexpected behavior of AI in deployment. A major reason for these limitations is AI's reliance on association-based learning, where non-representative machine learning datasets can amplify latent bias during training and/or hide it during testing. To unlock new tools capable of foreseeing and preventing such AI bias issues, we present G-AUDIT. Generalized Attribute Utility and Detectability-Induced bias Testing (G-AUDIT) for datasets is a modality-agnostic dataset auditing framework that allows for generating targeted hypotheses about sources of bias in training or testing data. Our method examines the relationship between task-level annotations (commonly referred to as ``labels'') and data properties including patient attributes (e.g., age, sex) and environment/acquisition characteristics (e.g., clinical site, imaging protocols). G-AUDIT quantifies the extent to which the observed data attributes pose a risk for shortcut learning, or in the case of testing data, might hide predictions made based on spurious associations. We demonstrate the broad applicability of our method by analyzing large-scale medical datasets for three distinct modalities and machine learning tasks: skin lesion classification in images, stigmatizing language classification in Electronic Health Records (EHR), and mortality prediction for ICU tabular data. In each setting, G-AUDIT successfully identifies subtle biases commonly overlooked by traditional qualitative methods, underscoring its practical value in exposing dataset-level risks and supporting the downstream development of reliable AI systems.

Jean Feng, Harvineet Singh, Fan Xia et al.

Machine learning (ML) algorithms can often differ in performance across domains. Understanding $\textit{why}$ their performance differs is crucial for determining what types of interventions (e.g., algorithmic or operational) are most effective at closing the performance gaps. Existing methods focus on $\textit{aggregate decompositions}$ of the total performance gap into the impact of a shift in the distribution of features $p(X)$ versus the impact of a shift in the conditional distribution of the outcome $p(Y|X)$; however, such coarse explanations offer only a few options for how one can close the performance gap. $\textit{Detailed variable-level decompositions}$ that quantify the importance of each variable to each term in the aggregate decomposition can provide a much deeper understanding and suggest much more targeted interventions. However, existing methods assume knowledge of the full causal graph or make strong parametric assumptions. We introduce a nonparametric hierarchical framework that provides both aggregate and detailed decompositions for explaining why the performance of an ML algorithm differs across domains, without requiring causal knowledge. We derive debiased, computationally-efficient estimators, and statistical inference procedures for asymptotically valid confidence intervals.

Seyed Kahaki, Alexander R. Webber, Ghada Zamzmi et al.

In modern cancer diagnostics, Whole Slide Imaging (WSI) is widely used to digitize tissue specimens for detailed, high-resolution examination; however, other diagnostic approaches, such as liquid biopsy and molecular testing, are also utilized based on the cancer type and clinical context. While WSI has revolutionized digital histopathology by enabling automated, precise analysis, it remains vulnerable to artifacts introduced during slide preparation and scanning. These artifacts can compromise downstream image analysis. To address this challenge, we propose and compare three robust artifact detection approaches for WSIs: (1) a foundation model-based approach (FMA) using a fine-tuned Unified Neural Image (UNI) architecture, (2) a deep learning approach (DLA) built on a ResNet50 backbone, and (3) a knowledge-based approach (KBA) leveraging handcrafted features from texture, color, and frequency-based metrics. The methods target six common artifact types: tissue folds, out-of-focus regions, air bubbles, tissue damage, marker traces, and blood contamination. Evaluations were conducted on 50,000+ image patches from diverse scanners (Hamamatsu, Philips, Leica Aperio AT2) across multiple sites. The FMA achieved the highest patch-wise AUROC of 0.995 (95% CI [0.994, 0.995]), outperforming the ResNet50-based method (AUROC: 0.977, 95% CI [0.977, 0.978]) and the KBA (AUROC: 0.940, 95% CI [0.933, 0.946]). To translate detection into actionable insights, we developed a quality report scorecard that quantifies high-quality patches and visualizes artifact distributions.

Ghada Zamzmi, Adarsh Subbaswamy, Elena Sizikova et al.

Although interest in synthetic medical data (SMD) for training and testing AI methods is growing, the absence of a standardized framework to evaluate its quality and applicability hinders its wider adoption. Here, we outline an evaluation framework designed to meet the unique requirements of medical applications, and introduce SMD Card, which can serve as comprehensive reports that accompany artificially generated datasets. This card provides a transparent and standardized framework for evaluating and reporting the quality of synthetic data, which can benefit SMD developers, users, and regulators, particularly for AI models using SMD in regulatory submissions.

Adarsh Subbaswamy, Roy Adams, Suchi Saria

As the use of machine learning in high impact domains becomes widespread, the importance of evaluating safety has increased. An important aspect of this is evaluating how robust a model is to changes in setting or population, which typically requires applying the model to multiple, independent datasets. Since the cost of collecting such datasets is often prohibitive, in this paper, we propose a framework for analyzing this type of stability using the available data. We use the original evaluation data to determine distributions under which the algorithm performs poorly, and estimate the algorithm's performance on the "worst-case" distribution. We consider shifts in user defined conditional distributions, allowing some distributions to shift while keeping other portions of the data distribution fixed. For example, in a healthcare context, this allows us to consider shifts in clinical practice while keeping the patient population fixed. To address the challenges associated with estimation in complex, high-dimensional distributions, we derive a "debiased" estimator which maintains $\sqrt{N}$-consistency even when machine learning methods with slower convergence rates are used to estimate the nuisance parameters. In experiments on a real medical risk prediction task, we show this estimator can be used to analyze stability and accounts for realistic shifts that could not previously be expressed. The proposed framework allows practitioners to proactively evaluate the safety of their models without requiring additional data collection.

Adarsh Subbaswamy, Suchi Saria

Shifts in environment between development and deployment cause classical supervised learning to produce models that fail to generalize well to new target distributions. Recently, many solutions which find invariant predictive distributions have been developed. Among these, graph-based approaches do not require data from the target environment and can capture more stable information than alternative methods which find stable feature sets. However, these approaches assume that the data generating process is known in the form of a full causal graph, which is generally not the case. In this paper, we propose I-SPEC, an end-to-end framework that addresses this shortcoming by using data to learn a partial ancestral graph (PAG). Using the PAG we develop an algorithm that determines an interventional distribution that is stable to the declared shifts; this subsumes existing approaches which find stable feature sets that are less accurate. We apply I-SPEC to a mortality prediction problem to show it can learn a model that is robust to shifts without needing upfront knowledge of the full causal DAG.

Adarsh Subbaswamy, Bryant Chen, Suchi Saria

Recent interest in the external validity of prediction models (i.e., the problem of different train and test distributions, known as dataset shift) has produced many methods for finding predictive distributions that are invariant to dataset shifts and can be used for prediction in new, unseen environments. However, these methods consider different types of shifts and have been developed under disparate frameworks, making it difficult to theoretically analyze how solutions differ with respect to stability and accuracy. Taking a causal graphical view, we use a flexible graphical representation to express various types of dataset shifts. Given a known graph of the data generating process, we show that all invariant distributions correspond to a causal hierarchy of graphical operators which disable the edges in the graph that are responsible for the shifts. The hierarchy provides a common theoretical underpinning for understanding when and how stability to shifts can be achieved, and in what ways stable distributions can differ. We use it to establish conditions for minimax optimal performance across environments, and derive new algorithms that find optimal stable distributions. Using this new perspective, we empirically demonstrate that that there is a tradeoff between minimax and average performance.

Suchi Saria, Adarsh Subbaswamy

This document serves as a brief overview of the "Safe and Reliable Machine Learning" tutorial given at the 2019 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* 2019). The talk slides can be found here: https://bit.ly/2Gfsukp, while a video of the talk is available here: https://youtu.be/FGLOCkC4KmE, and a complete list of references for the tutorial here: https://bit.ly/2GdLPme.

Adarsh Subbaswamy, Peter Schulam, Suchi Saria

Classical supervised learning produces unreliable models when training and target distributions differ, with most existing solutions requiring samples from the target domain. We propose a proactive approach which learns a relationship in the training domain that will generalize to the target domain by incorporating prior knowledge of aspects of the data generating process that are expected to differ as expressed in a causal selection diagram. Specifically, we remove variables generated by unstable mechanisms from the joint factorization to yield the Surgery Estimator---an interventional distribution that is invariant to the differences across environments. We prove that the surgery estimator finds stable relationships in strictly more scenarios than previous approaches which only consider conditional relationships, and demonstrate this in simulated experiments. We also evaluate on real world data for which the true causal diagram is unknown, performing competitively against entirely data-driven approaches.

Adarsh Subbaswamy, Suchi Saria

Predictive models can fail to generalize from training to deployment environments because of dataset shift, posing a threat to model reliability and the safety of downstream decisions made in practice. Instead of using samples from the target distribution to reactively correct dataset shift, we use graphical knowledge of the causal mechanisms relating variables in a prediction problem to proactively remove relationships that do not generalize across environments, even when these relationships may depend on unobserved variables (violations of the "no unobserved confounders" assumption). To accomplish this, we identify variables with unstable paths of statistical influence and remove them from the model. We also augment the causal graph with latent counterfactual variables that isolate unstable paths of statistical influence, allowing us to retain stable paths that would otherwise be removed. Our experiments demonstrate that models that remove vulnerable variables and use estimates of the latent variables transfer better, often outperforming in the target domain despite some accuracy loss in the training domain.

Hossein Soleimani, Adarsh Subbaswamy, Suchi Saria

Treatment effects can be estimated from observational data as the difference in potential outcomes. In this paper, we address the challenge of estimating the potential outcome when treatment-dose levels can vary continuously over time. Further, the outcome variable may not be measured at a regular frequency. Our proposed solution represents the treatment response curves using linear time-invariant dynamical systems---this provides a flexible means for modeling response over time to highly variable dose curves. Moreover, for multivariate data, the proposed method: uncovers shared structure in treatment response and the baseline across multiple markers; and, flexibly models challenging correlation structure both across and within signals over time. For this, we build upon the framework of multiple-output Gaussian Processes. On simulated and a challenging clinical dataset, we show significant gains in accuracy over state-of-the-art models.