BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Prasad Chalasani

Prasad Chalasani contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

CAUSE: Learning Granger Causality from Event Sequences using Attribution Methods

We study the problem of learning Granger causality between event types from asynchronous, interdependent, multi-type event sequences. Existing work suffers from either limited model flexibility or poor model explainability and thus fails to uncover Granger causality across a wide variety of event sequences with diverse event interdependency. To address these weaknesses, we propose CAUSE (Causality from AttribUtions on Sequence of Events), a novel framework for the studied task. The key idea of CAUSE is to first implicitly capture the underlying event interdependency by fitting a neural point process, and then extract from the process a Granger causality statistic using an axiomatic attribution method. Across multiple datasets riddled with diverse event interdependency, we demonstrate that CAUSE achieves superior performance on correctly inferring the inter-type Granger causality over a range of state-of-the-art methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Concise Explanations of Neural Networks using Adversarial Training

We show new connections between adversarial learning and explainability for deep neural networks (DNNs). One form of explanation of the output of a neural network model in terms of its input features, is a vector of feature-attributions. Two desirable characteristics of an attribution-based explanation are: (1) $\textit{sparseness}$: the attributions of irrelevant or weakly relevant features should be negligible, thus resulting in $\textit{concise}$ explanations in terms of the significant features, and (2) $\textit{stability}$: it should not vary significantly within a small local neighborhood of the input. Our first contribution is a theoretical exploration of how these two properties (when using attributions based on Integrated Gradients, or IG) are related to adversarial training, for a class of 1-layer networks (which includes logistic regression models for binary and multi-class classification); for these networks we show that (a) adversarial training using an $\ell_\infty$-bounded adversary produces models with sparse attribution vectors, and (b) natural model-training while encouraging stable explanations (via an extra term in the loss function), is equivalent to adversarial training. Our second contribution is an empirical verification of phenomenon (a), which we show, somewhat surprisingly, occurs $\textit{not only}$ $\textit{in 1-layer networks}$, $\textit{but also DNNs}$ $\textit{trained on }$ $\textit{standard image datasets}$, and extends beyond IG-based attributions, to those based on DeepSHAP: adversarial training with $\ell_\infty$-bounded perturbations yields significantly sparser attribution vectors, with little degradation in performance on natural test data, compared to natural training. Moreover, the sparseness of the attribution vectors is significantly better than that achievable via $\ell_1$-regularized natural training.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Representation Bayesian Risk Decompositions and Multi-Source Domain Adaptation

We consider representation learning (hypothesis class $\mathcal{H} = \mathcal{F}\circ\mathcal{G}$) where training and test distributions can be different. Recent studies provide hints and failure examples for domain invariant representation learning, a common approach for this problem, but the explanations provided are somewhat different and do not provide a unified picture. In this paper, we provide new decompositions of risk which give finer-grained explanations and clarify potential generalization issues. For Single-Source Domain Adaptation, we give an exact decomposition (an equality) of the target risk, via a natural hybrid argument, as sum of three factors: (1) source risk, (2) representation conditional label divergence, and (3) representation covariate shift. We derive a similar decomposition for the Multi-Source case. These decompositions reveal factors (2) and (3) as the precise reasons for failure to generalize. For example, we demonstrate that domain adversarial neural networks (DANN) attempt to regularize for (3) but miss (2), while a recent technique Invariant Risk Minimization (IRM) attempts to account for (2) but does not consider (3). We also verify our observations experimentally.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access