Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36213164›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2022

Yes we care!-Certification for machine learning methods through the care label framework.

Katharina J Morik, Helena Kotthaus, Raphael Fischer, Sascha Mücke, Matthias Jakobs, Nico Piatkowski, Andreas Pauly, Lukas Heppe, Danny Heinrich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Katharina J MorikFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Helena KotthausFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Raphael FischerFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Sascha MückeFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Matthias JakobsFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Nico PiatkowskiFraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems, Sankt Augustin, Germany.
Andreas PaulyFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Lukas HeppeFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Danny HeinrichFaculty of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning applications have become ubiquitous. Their applications range from embedded control in production machines over process optimization in diverse areas (e.g., traffic, finance, sciences) to direct user interactions like advertising and recommendations. This has led to an increased effort of making machine learning trustworthy. Explainable and fair AI have already matured. They address the knowledgeable user and the application engineer. However, there are users that want to deploy a learned model in a similar way as their washing machine. These stakeholders do not want to spend time in understanding the model, but want to rely on guaranteed properties. What are the relevant properties? How can they be expressed to the stake- holder without presupposing machine learning knowledge? How can they be guaranteed for a certain implementation of a machine learning model? These questions move far beyond the current state of the art and we want to address them here. We propose a unified framework that certifies learning methods

Indexed as

care labelscertificationprobabilistic graphical modelstesting machine learningtrustworthy AI

Identifiers

PMID36213164
PMCPMC9532619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.