skip to main content
10.1145/3520304.3533959acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Interpretable AI for policy-making in pandemics

Published:19 July 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Since the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments have applied restrictions in order to slow down its spreading. However, creating such policies is hard, especially because the government needs to trade-off the spreading of the pandemic with the economic losses. For this reason, several works have applied machine learning techniques, often with the help of special-purpose simulators, to generate policies that were more effective than the ones obtained by governments. While the performance of such approaches are promising, they suffer from a fundamental issue: since such approaches are based on black-box machine learning, their real-world applicability is limited, because these policies cannot be analyzed, nor tested, and thus they are not trustable. In this work, we employ a recently developed hybrid approach, which combines reinforcement learning with evolutionary computation, for the generation of interpretable policies for containing the pandemic. These policies, trained on an existing simulator, aim to reduce the spreading of the pandemic while minimizing the economic losses. Our results show that our approach is able to find solutions that are extremely simple, yet very powerful. In fact, our approach has significantly better performance (in simulated scenarios) than both previous work and government policies.

References

  1. Khalil Al Handawi and Michael Kokkolaras. 2021. Optimization of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Policies Using Artificial Life. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence 6 (2021), 26--40. Issue 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Alejandro Barredo Arrieta, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, Javier Del Ser, Adrien Bennetot, Siham Tabik, Alberto Barbado, Salvador Garcia, Sergio Gil-Lopez, Daniel Molina, Richard Benjamins, Raja Chatila, and Francisco Herrera. 2020. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion 58 (June 2020), 82--115. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Leonardo Lucio Custode and Giovanni Iacca. 2020. Evolutionary learning of interpretable decision trees.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Leonardo Lucio Custode and Giovanni Iacca. 2021. A co-evolutionary approach to interpretable reinforcement learning in environments with continuous action spaces. In Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Leonardo Lucio Custode and Giovanni Iacca. 2022. Interpretable pipelines with evolutionarily optimized modules for RL tasks with visual inputs.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Yashesh Dhebar, Kalyanmoy Deb, Subramanya Nageshrao, Ling Zhu, and Dimitar Filev. 2020. Interpretable-AI Policies using Evolutionary Nonlinear Decision Trees for Discrete Action Systems. http://arxiv.org/abs/2009.09521Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Nikolaus Hansen and Andreas Ostermeier. 1996. Adapting arbitrary normal mutation distributions in evolution strategies: The covariance matrix adaptation. In IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 312--317.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Varun Kompella*, Roberto Capobianco*, Stacy Jong, Jonathan Browne, Spencer Fox, Lauren Meyers, Peter Wurman, and Peter Stone. 2020. Reinforcement Learning for Optimization of COVID-19 Mitigation policies. arXiv:2010.10560 [cs.LG]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. John R. Koza. 1992. Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Risto Miikkulainen, Olivier Francon, Elliot Meyerson, Xin Qiu, Darren Sargent, Elisa Canzani, and Babak Hodjat. 2021. From prediction to prescription: evolutionary optimization of nonpharmaceutical interventions in the COVID-19 pandemic. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 25, 2 (2021), 386--401.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Mitchell A. Potter and Kenneth A. De Jong. 1994. A cooperative coevolutionary approach to function optimization. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature --- PPSN III. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 249--257. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Cynthia Rudin. 2019. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nature Machine Intelligence 1, 5 (May 2019), 206--215. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Cynthia Rudin, Chaofan Chen, Zhi Chen, Haiyang Huang, Lesia Semenova, and Chudi Zhong. 2021. Interpretable Machine Learning: Fundamental Principles and 10 Grand Challenges.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Conor Ryan, Jj Collins, and Michael O Neill. 1998. Grammatical evolution: Evolving programs for an arbitrary language. In European Conference on Genetic Programming. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 83--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Radford, and Oleg Klimov. 2017. Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms. http://arxiv.org/abs/1707.06347 arXiv:1707.06347.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Andrew Silva, Matthew Gombolay, Taylor Killian, Ivan Jimenez, and Sung-Hyun Son. 2020. Optimization Methods for Interpretable Differentiable Decision Trees Applied to Reinforcement Learning. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. PMLR, Palermo, Italy, 1855--1865. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v108/silva20a.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Alexander Trott, Sunil Srinivasa, Douwe van der Wal, Sebastien Haneuse, and Stephan Zheng. 2021. Building a foundation for data-driven, interpretable, and robust policy design using the ai economist.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Marco Virgolin, Andrea De Lorenzo, Eric Medvet, and Francesca Randone. 2020. Learning a Formula of Interpretability to Learn Interpretable Formulas. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - PPSN XVI, Thomas Bäck, Mike Preuss, André Deutz, Hao Wang, Carola Doerr, Michael Emmerich, and Heike Trautmann (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 79--93.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Christopher John Cornish Hellaby Watkins. 1989. Learning from delayed rewards. Ph.D. Dissertation. King's College, Cambridge, United Kingdom.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Interpretable AI for policy-making in pandemics
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          GECCO '22: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion
          July 2022
          2395 pages
          ISBN:9781450392686
          DOI:10.1145/3520304

          Copyright © 2022 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 July 2022

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

          Upcoming Conference

          GECCO '24
          Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
          July 14 - 18, 2024
          Melbourne , VIC , Australia

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader