A Theory of Interpretable Approximations

Abstract

Can a deep neural network be approximated by a small decision tree based on simple features? This question and its variants are behind the growing demand for machine learning models that are *interpretable* by humans. In this work we study such questions by introducing *interpretable approximations*, a notion that captures the idea of approximating a target concept c by a small aggregation of concepts from some base class H. In particular, we consider the approximation of a binary concept c by decision trees based on a simple class H (e.g., of bounded VC dimension), and use the tree depth as a measure of complexity. Our primary contribution is the following remarkable trichotomy. For any given pair of H and c, exactly one of these cases holds: (i) c cannot be approximated by H with arbitrary accuracy; (ii) c can be approximated by H with arbitrary accuracy, but there exists no universal rate that bounds the complexity of the approximations as a function of the accuracy; or (iii) there exists a constant that depends only on H and c such that, for *any* data distribution and *any* desired accuracy level, c can be approximated by H with a complexity not exceeding . This taxonomy stands in stark contrast to the landscape of supervised classification, which offers a complex array of distribution-free and universally learnable scenarios. We show that, in the case of interpretable approximations, even a slightly nontrivial a-priori guarantee on the complexity of approximations implies approximations with constant (distribution-free and accuracy-free) complexity. We extend our trichotomy to classes H of unbounded VC dimension and give characterizations of interpretability based on the algebra generated by H.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…