arXiv Machine Learning By Leonard Engmann, Christian Medeiros Adriano, Holger Giese

From Observation to Intervention: A Causal Audit of Expert Importance in Mixture-of-Experts Models

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

arXiv:2606. 10703v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Interpretability methods routinely use population-level summary statistics over observed model behaviour to license claims about the effects of targeted interventions on specific computations; in Pearl's terms, they treat rung-1 associational evidence as if it supported rung-2 interventional conclusions, a move whose validity is rarely tested.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv AI
Sep 7

Necessary or Sufficient? Evaluating LLM Explanations With Behavioural Evidence

The paper investigates whether the factors highlighted by large language models (LLMs) as most influential on their decisions truly reflect necessity or sufficiency in influencing outcomes. By applying controlled black‑box interventions across eight models from Claude, GPT, and Gemini, the authors quantify necessity and sufficiency scores for each factor and compare them to the models’ self‑reported top three factors. Results show modest correlations (≈0.35–0.58) and reveal that the cited top factors often fail to capture the strongest measured influences, indicating limitations in current explanation practices.

By Urja Pawar, Rajitha Ramanayake, Nabeel Kemal, Ashwin Kandath, Owen O'Neill, Guillaume Bourgeon, Houssem Chatbri