Download pdf
Comparative Analysis of Water Applicability Predictions Explained by The LightGBM Model Using SHAP and LIME
- 1 University of Georgia
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
This article mainly discusses the application of the LightGBM model to predict water potability for a dataset containing multiple water quality features. The focus of the study is to use two popular model interpretability techniques: SHAP and LIME to explain the model's prediction results. The results show that SHAP can globally explain the feature importance of the entire dataset and provide a deep understanding of the features and model behavior, while LIME provides a detailed explanation of a single prediction through local linear approximation, which is easier to interpret and apply. This article also compares the strengths and limitations of SHAP and LIME in explaining the LightGBM model’s behavior, demonstrating their applicability and explanatory power in different contexts. In addition, this article also explores the actual application scenarios of water quality prediction and analyzes how interpretability improves model transparency and trust in this field. Through these analyses, the article provides practical suggestions on how to choose appropriate model interpretation methods in reality.
Keywords
Water Drinkability, LightGBM, SHAP, LIME, Interpretable Model.
[1]. Bahri, Fouad, Hakim Saibi, and Mohammed-El-Hocine Cherchali. "Characterization, classification, and determination of drinkability of some Algerian thermal waters." Arabian Journal of Geosciences 4 (2011).
[2]. Man, Xin, and Ernest Chan. "The best way to select features? comparing mda, lime, and shap." The Journal of Financial Data Science Winter 3.1 (2021): 127-139.
[3]. Ke, Guolin, et al. "Lightgbm: A highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree." Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017)
[4]. Bradley, Andrew P. "The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms." Pattern recognition 30.7 (1997): 1145-1159.
[5]. Li, Xuhong, et al. "Interpretable deep learning: Interpretation, interpretability, trustworthiness, and beyond." Knowledge and Information Systems 64.12 (2022): 3197-3234.
[6]. Ribeiro, Marco Tulio, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. "" Why should i trust you?" Explaining the predictions of any classifier." Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. 2016.
[7]. Van den Broeck, Guy, et al. "On the tractability of SHAP explanations." Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 74 (2022): 851-886.
[8]. Shankaranarayana, Sharath M., and Davor Runje. "ALIME: Autoencoder based approach for local interpretability." Intelligent Data Engineering and Automated Learning–IDEAL 2019: 20th International Conference, Manchester, UK, November 14–16, 2019, Proceedings, Part I 20. Springer International Publishing, 2019.
[9]. Hu, Linwei, et al. "Locally interpretable models and effects based on supervised partitioning (LIME-SUP)." arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.00663 (2018).
[10]. Hasan, Md Mahmudul. "Understanding Model Predictions: A Comparative Analysis of SHAP and LIME on Various ML Algorithms." Journal of Scientific and Technological Research 5.1 (2023): 17-26.
[11]. Salih, Ahmed M., et al. "A Perspective on Explainable Artificial Intelligence Methods: SHAP and LIME." Advanced Intelligent Systems (2024): 2400304.
[12]. Aditya, P., and Mayukha Pal. "Local interpretable model agnostic shap explanations for machine learning models." arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.04533 (2022).
Cite this article
Zhang,J. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Water Applicability Predictions Explained by The LightGBM Model Using SHAP and LIME. Applied and Computational Engineering,104,150-158.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Machine Learning and Automation
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).