Pownie/adm-pres
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Added some notes regarding authors

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Alexander Munch-Hansen 2019-11-24 02:24:11 +01:00
parent 589920550a
commit 92b57a6016
2 changed files with 16 additions and 5 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

BIN
pres.pdf
View File

Binary file not shown.

21
pres.tex
View File

@ -49,12 +49,16 @@
\frametitle{Authors} \frametitle{Authors}
\begin{itemize} \begin{itemize}
\item Marco Tulio Ribeiro, PhD from University of Washington, Currently a researcher for Microsoft \item Marco Tulio Ribeiro, PhD from University of Washington, Currently a researcher for Microsoft
\note{lol}
\item Sameer Singh, PhD from University of Massachusetts Amherst, adviser for Marco \item Sameer Singh, PhD from University of Massachusetts Amherst, adviser for Marco
\item Carlos Guestrin, Professor at University of Washington, adviser for Marco \item Carlos Guestrin, Professor at University of Washington, adviser for Marco
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}
\end{frame} \end{frame}
\note[itemize] {
\item This paper won the Audience appreciation award
\item These also wrote \say{Model-Agnostic Interpretability of Machine Learning}
\item Marco's research focus for his PhD was making it easier for humans to understand and interact with machine learning models.
}
%\subsection{Publishing} %\subsection{Publishing}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Metropolis} \begin{frame}[fragile]{Metropolis}
@ -70,7 +74,9 @@
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}
\end{frame} \end{frame}
\note[itemize] {
\item Main take-away is that this paper was shown at a respected conference
}
\section{Article} \section{Article}
%\subsection{Problem} %\subsection{Problem}
@ -402,7 +408,7 @@
\end{frame} \end{frame}
\section{Experiments} \section{Experiments}
%\subsection{Simulated User Experiments} \subsection{Simulated User Experiments}
%\subsubsection{Setup} %\subsubsection{Setup}
\begin{frame} \begin{frame}
\frametitle{Experiments} \frametitle{Experiments}
@ -505,7 +511,7 @@
\item Accomplished by "marking" the artificial features found within the B instances seen, as unstrustworthy. We then evaluate how many total predictions in the validation set should be trusted (as in the previous section, treating only marked features as untrustworthy). \item Accomplished by "marking" the artificial features found within the B instances seen, as unstrustworthy. We then evaluate how many total predictions in the validation set should be trusted (as in the previous section, treating only marked features as untrustworthy).
\item SP-parzen and RP-parzen are omitted from the figure since they did not produce useful explanations, performing only slightly better than random. Is this ok? \item SP-parzen and RP-parzen are omitted from the figure since they did not produce useful explanations, performing only slightly better than random. Is this ok?
} }
\subsection{Human user experiments}
\begin{frame} \begin{frame}
\frametitle{Human evaluation setup} \frametitle{Human evaluation setup}
\begin{itemize} \begin{itemize}
@ -629,4 +635,9 @@
\item It shown to make it significantly easier for people to better the classifiers, even non-experts. \item It shown to make it significantly easier for people to better the classifiers, even non-experts.
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}
\end{frame} \end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{Discussion}
\end{frame}
\end{document} \end{document}