Source author record

John P. Lalor

John P. Lalor appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
2topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Measuring algorithmic interpretability: A human-learning-based framework and the corresponding cognitive complexity score

Algorithmic interpretability is necessary to build trust, ensure fairness, and track accountability. However, there is no existing formal measurement method for algorithmic interpretability. In this work, we build upon programming language theory and cognitive load theory to develop a framework for measuring algorithmic interpretability. The proposed measurement framework reflects the process of a human learning an algorithm. We show that the measurement framework and the resulting cognitive complexity score have the following desirable properties - universality, computability, uniqueness, and monotonicity. We illustrate the measurement framework through a toy example, describe the framework and its conceptual underpinnings, and demonstrate the benefits of the framework, in particular for managers considering tradeoffs when selecting algorithms.

preprint2016arXiv

Building an Evaluation Scale using Item Response Theory

Evaluation of NLP methods requires testing against a previously vetted gold-standard test set and reporting standard metrics (accuracy/precision/recall/F1). The current assumption is that all items in a given test set are equal with regards to difficulty and discriminating power. We propose Item Response Theory (IRT) from psychometrics as an alternative means for gold-standard test-set generation and NLP system evaluation. IRT is able to describe characteristics of individual items - their difficulty and discriminating power - and can account for these characteristics in its estimation of human intelligence or ability for an NLP task. In this paper, we demonstrate IRT by generating a gold-standard test set for Recognizing Textual Entailment. By collecting a large number of human responses and fitting our IRT model, we show that our IRT model compares NLP systems with the performance in a human population and is able to provide more insight into system performance than standard evaluation metrics. We show that a high accuracy score does not always imply a high IRT score, which depends on the item characteristics and the response pattern.