Skip to main content

MLIC: A MaxSAT-Based Framework for Learning Interpretable Classification Rules

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11008))

  • The original version of this chapter was revised: There was a typing error in the family name of the first author. This has now been corrected. The correction to this chapter is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98334-9_49

Abstract

The wide adoption of machine learning approaches in the industry, government, medicine and science has renewed the interest in interpretable machine learning: many decisions are too important to be delegated to black-box techniques such as deep neural networks or kernel SVMs. Historically, problems of learning interpretable classifiers, including classification rules or decision trees, have been approached by greedy heuristic methods as essentially all the exact optimization formulations are NP-hard. Our primary contribution is a MaxSAT-based framework, called \(\mathcal {MLIC}\), which allows principled search for interpretable classification rules expressible in propositional logic. Our approach benefits from the revolutionary advances in the constraint satisfaction community to solve large-scale instances of such problems. In experimental evaluations over a collection of benchmarks arising from practical scenarios we demonstrate its effectiveness: we show that the formulation can solve large classification problems with tens or hundreds of thousands of examples and thousands of features, and to provide a tunable balance of accuracy vs. interpretability. Furthermore, we show that in many problems interpretability can be obtained at only a minor cost in accuracy.

The primary objective of the paper is to show that recent advances in the MaxSAT literature make it realistic to find optimal (or very high quality near-optimal) solutions to large-scale classification problems. We also hope to encourage researchers in both interpretable classification and in the constraint programming community to take it further and develop richer formulations, and bespoke solvers attuned to the problem of interpretable ML.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Change history

  • 13 February 2019

    In the original version of this chapter there was a typing error in the family name of the first author. This has now been corrected.

Notes

  1. 1.

    We discuss in Sect. 3 that such a restriction can be achieved without loss of generality.

  2. 2.

    The framework proposed in this paper allows generalization to other forms of rules, as we discuss in Sect. 3.6.

  3. 3.

    Cost-sensitive classification is defined analogously by allowing a separate parameter for false positives and false negatives.

  4. 4.

    A detailed evaluation among different MaxSAT solvers is beyond the scope of this work and left for future work.

  5. 5.

    The source code of \(\mathcal {MLIC}\) and benchmarks can be viewed at https://github.com/meelgroup/mlic.

  6. 6.

    Note, however, that the objective functions for the integer program and the LP relaxation in these papers are not the same as sparsity-penalized cost-sensitive classification error.

References

  1. Andrews, R., Diederich, J., Tickle, A.: Survey and critique of techniques for extracting rules from trained artificial neural networks. Knowl. Based Syst. 8(6), 373–389 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. van Beek, P., Hoffmann, H.F.: Machine learning of Bayesian networks using constraint programming. In: Proceedings of CP, pp. 429–445 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berg, J., Saikko, P., Järvisalo, M.: Improving the effectiveness of sat-based preprocessing for MaxSAT. In: Proceedings of IJCAI (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bertsimas, D., Chang, A., Rudin, C.: An integer optimization approach to associative classification. Adv. Neur. Inf. Process. Syst. 25, 269–277 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bessiere, C., Hebrard, E., O’Sullivan, B.: Minimising decision tree size as combinatorial optimisation. In: Gent, I.P. (ed.) CP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5732, pp. 173–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04244-7_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Blake, C., Merz, C.J.: \(\{\)UCI\(\}\) repository of machine learning databases (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boros, E., Hammer, P., Ibaraki, T., Kogan, A., Mayoraz, E., Muchnik, I.: An implementation of logical analysis of data. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 12(2), 292–306 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C., Olshen, R.: Classification and Regression Trees. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1984)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Clark, P., Niblett, T.: The CN2 induction algorithm. Mach. Learn. 3(4), 261–283 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen, W.W.: Fast effective rule induction. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 115–123. Tahoe City, CA, July 1995

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Cohen, W.W., Singer, Y.: A simple, fast, and effective rule learner. In: Proceedings of National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 335–342, Orlando, FL. July 1999

    Google Scholar 

  12. Craven, M.W., Shavlik, J.W.: Extracting tree-structured representations of trained networks. In: Proceedings of NIPS, pp. 24–30 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Davies, J., Bacchus, F.: Solving MaxSAT by solving a sequence of simpler sat instances. In: Proceedings of CP, pp. 225–239 (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. De Raedt, L., Guns, T., Nijssen, S.: Constraint programming for itemset mining. In: Proceedings of KDD, pp. 204–212 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dembczyński, K., Kotłowski, W., Słowiński, R.: Ender: a statistical framework for boosting decision rules. Data Mining Knowl. Discov. 21(1), 52–90 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Emad, A., Varshney, K.R., Malioutov, D.M.: A semiquantitative group testing approach for learning interpretable clinical prediction rules. In: Proceedings of Signal Process. Adapt. Sparse Struct. Repr. Workshop, Cambridge, UK (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Freitas, A.: Comprehensible classification models: a position paper. ACM SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 15(1), 1–10 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Friedman, J.H., Popescu, B.E.: Predictive learning via rule ensembles. Ann. Appl. Stat. 2(3), 916–954 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Jawanpuria, P., Jagarlapudi, S.N., Ramakrishnan, G.: Efficient rule ensemble learning using hierarchical kernels. In: Proceedings of ICML (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Letham, B., Rudin, C., McCormick, T.H., Madigan, D.: Building interpretable classifiers with rules using Bayesian analysis. Technical report 609, Department of Statistics. University of Washington, December 2012

    Google Scholar 

  21. Malioutov, D.M., Varshney, K.R.: Exact rule learning via Boolean compressed sensing. In: Proceedings of ICML, pp. 765–773 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Marchand, M., Shawe-Taylor, J.: The set covering machine. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3(Dec), 723–746 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Nijssen, S., Guns, T., De Raedt, L.: Correlated itemset mining in ROC space: a constraint programming approach. In: KDD, pp. 647–656. ACM (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Quinlan, J.R.: C4.5: Programming for Machine Learning, p. 38. Morgan Kauffmann, San Francisco (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rivest, R.L.: Learning decision lists. Mach. Learn. 2(3), 229–246 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Rückert, U., Kramer, S.: Margin-based first-order rule learning. Mach. Learn. 70(2–3), 189–206 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Valiant, L.G.: Learning disjunctions of conjunctions. In: Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 560–566. Los Angeles, CA, August 1985

    Google Scholar 

  28. Varshney, K.R.: Data science of the people, for the people, by the people: a viewpoint on an emerging dichotomy. In: Proceedings of Data for Good Exchange Conference (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wang, T., Rudin, C., Doshi-Velez, F., Liu, Y., Klampfl, E., MacNeille, P.: Or’s of And’s for interpretable classification, with application to context-aware recommender systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.07614 (2015)

  30. Wang, T., Rudin, C., Liu, Y., Klampfl, E., MacNeille, P.: Bayesian Or’s of And’s for interpretable classification with application to context aware recommender systems (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by NUS ODPRT Grant, R-252-000-685-133 and IBM PhD Fellowship. The computational work for this article was performed on resources of the National Supercomputing Centre, Singapore, https://www.nscc.sg.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kuldeep S. Meel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Malioutov, D., Meel, K.S. (2018). MLIC: A MaxSAT-Based Framework for Learning Interpretable Classification Rules. In: Hooker, J. (eds) Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. CP 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11008. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98334-9_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98334-9_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98333-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98334-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics