Invariant Rationalization
  Selective rationalization improves neural network interpretability by
identifying a small subset of input features -- the rationale -- that best
explains or supports the prediction. A typical rationalization criterion, i.e.
maximum mutual information (MMI), finds the rationale that maximizes the
prediction performance based only on the rationale. However, MMI can be
problematic because it picks up spurious correlations between the input
features and the output. Instead, we introduce a game-theoretic invariant
rationalization criterion where the rationales are constrained to enable the
same predictor to be optimal across different environments. We show both
theoretically and empirically that the proposed rationales can rule out
spurious correlations, generalize better to different test scenarios, and align
better with human judgments. Our data and code are available.
