Rethinking Explanations: Formalizing Contrast in Description Logics
Yasir Mahmood, Arnab Sharma, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo, Balram Tiwari

TL;DR
This paper introduces contrastive explanations for description logic knowledge bases, focusing on why one axiom is true instead of another, addressing user needs and understanding.
Contribution
It formalizes contrastive explanations in description logics and explores their properties, implementation, and evaluation on various knowledge bases.
Findings
Formal foundations of contrasting questions are established.
Contrastive explanations are defined within description logics EL and ALC.
An implementation and experimental evaluation demonstrate practical applicability.
Abstract
There has been a growing interest in explaining entailments over description logic (DL) knowledge bases. The existing explanation formalisms focus on justifications to explain true axioms, and abductive reasoning to explain missing axioms in a knowledge base. However, these formalisms only point out the reasoning steps behind a (missing) entailment and lack a user-centered approach as they do not consider an inquirer's needs, level of understanding, or prior knowledge. We propose contrastive explanations, aiming at answering "why an axiom P (fact) is true instead of another axiom Q (foil)" over description logic knowledge bases. The motivation arises from the observation that when a user discovers that P has occurred, they are often surprised because they anticipated the occurrence of another similar event Q. Furthermore, individual explanations for "why P" and "why not Q" are…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
