Question: How to perform global explanation on an EBM where the bins have been modified with the GAM changer

[HenrikSmith]

Hello everyone,

first of all, thank you so much for your work, the interpret ML package continues to be a great tool for us!

I have been trying to perform global explanation on EBMs which have been modified using the GAM changer. It does work as long as only the contributions are altered but the bins are not modified in any way. However, as soon as the bin boundaries move or the overall number of bins is changed, I keep on getting a ValueError. What am I missing here, is there any way to fix this?

.../Lib/site-packages/interpret/glassbox/_ebm/_ebm.py:1528)         upper_bound = max(upper_bound, np.max(scores))
.../Lib/site-packages/interpret/glassbox/_ebm/_ebm.py:1529)     else:
.../Lib/site-packages/interpret/glassbox/_ebm/_ebm.py:1530)         lower_bound = min(lower_bound, np.min(scores - errors))
.../Lib/site-packages/interpret/glassbox/_ebm/_ebm.py:1531)         upper_bound = max(upper_bound, np.max(scores + errors))
.../Lib/site-packages/interpret/glassbox/_ebm/_ebm.py:1533) bounds = (lower_bound, upper_bound)

ValueError: operands could not be broadcast together with shapes (10,) (9,)

[paulbkoch]

Try setting:

ebm.standard_deviations_ = None

[HenrikSmith]

Hello Paul, thanks for your reply - I tried this and unfortunately I'm getting a "TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not iterable". Can you shed some light on what happens in the background?

[paulbkoch]

Ok, then try:

del ebm.standard_deviations_

I'm not really sure what's going on in the GAMChanger code to cause this, but it appears the dimensionality of the standard_deviations_ attribute is different from the term_scores_ attribute in the resulting model, which is an error.

You should be able to delete the standard_deviations_ attribute though as it's optional. It contains the error bars shown in the graphs. If you're modifying the graphs though I would say the error bars are no longer a fair representation of how the model was constructed on the original data, so it would probably make sense to delete them.

You might want to raise this as an issue in the GAMChanger repo where I believe the underlying issue resides. I haven't really looked at that codebase and it's maintained by Jay Wang.