ISAAC: Auditing Causal Reasoning in Deep Models for Drug-Target Interaction
Authors: Barbara Tarantino, Sun Kim, Yijingxiu Lu, Paolo Giudici
Abstract
Deep learning models for drug--target interaction (DTI) prediction often achieve strong benchmark performance without necessarily relying on mechanistically meaningful molecular features, a limitation that standard accuracy-based evaluation cannot detect. We introduce ISAAC (Intervention-based Structural Auditing Approach for Causal Reasoning), a post-hoc framework that evaluates prior-relative structural sensitivity by probing frozen models through matched mechanistic and spurious input-level interventions, independently of predictive accuracy. Applied to three sequence-based DTI architectures on the Davis benchmark, ISAAC reveals approximately 25% relative differences in reasoning scores across models with comparable AUROC (within around 3%), stable across training and intervention seeds and two distinct perturbation operators. These discrepancies, undetectable under conventional accuracy metrics, motivate the use of post-hoc structural auditing as a complement to standard performance evaluation in scientific machine learning for molecular modeling.
Drug-target interaction (DTI) and affinity (DTA) predictors increasingly achieve strong benchmark scores, yet their internal use of sequence, fingerprint, and graph features often remains opaque. We present an interpretability audit of BridgeDPI architecture on three different datasets including Gao, Human, and C.elegans. This study combines gradient-based attributions -- integrated gradients, saliency, layer-wise relevance propagation, SmoothGrad, and SmoothGrad-IG -- with feature-wise occlusion ablation and strict intersection consensus across methods to reduce single-explainer bias. We summarize sensitivity and signed effects at raw inputs, at the bridge similarity scaffold, and through the graph convolution, including edge-level sensitivities and targeted edge removals. The results show that explainability is most informative when treated as model criticism: it reveals modality dominance, padding and special-token artifacts, dataset-dependent cooperative versus suppressive effects across layers, and chemistry-consistent fragment and composition motifs where methods agree. These analyses do not substitute for structural or experimental ground truth, yet they can provide testable hypotheses for downstream validation in computational drug discovery pipelines. More broadly, applying modern XAI to contemporary DTI/DTA models is still an early pass over the rich structure implicit in trained weights and data -- yet even this first layer of scrutiny already helps researchers relate predictions to drug- and target-side representations and to prioritize external validation.
Deep learning models are increasingly used in scientific prediction tasks where strong benchmark performance is often interpreted as evidence of scientifically meaningful behavior. This interpretation is fragile, as models may exploit shortcut features, dataset-specific regularities, or distributional biases that are predictive on held-out data but not aligned with domain-relevant structure. To address this limitation, we introduce the \textsc{I-SAFE} (Interventional Secure, Accurate, Fair and Explainable) framework, a post-hoc distributional auditing framework for scientific AI models centered on the Wasserstein Coherence Metric (WCM). Given a trained black-box predictor and an external structural prior encoding domain knowledge about task-relevant input structure, \textsc{I-SAFE} evaluates raw model outputs under structurally guided perturbations of the input. The proposed audit measures output-distribution coherence through three complementary metrics: a Quantile-Based Metric (QBM) for location-level coherence, the WCM for ordinal coherence, and a translation-invariant WCM variant for shape coherence. We instantiate \textsc{I-SAFE} on drug--target interaction (DTI) prediction using the Davis kinase benchmark, KLIFS (Kinase--Ligand Interaction Fingerprints and Structures) binding-pocket annotations, and three sequence-based DTI models: DeepConvDTI, DeepDTA, and TAPB. Although the models operate in a comparable predictive regime, \textsc{I-SAFE} reveals substantially different distributional response profiles, a distinction invisible to accuracy-based evaluation. The framework is model-agnostic and applicable to any domain where inputs admit a structured decomposition and an external prior is available.
Barbara Tarantino, Gennaro Auricchio, Paolo Giudici
Predicting whether two drugs interact (binary detection) is a substantially dif- ferent task from predicting the mechanism type of that interaction (multi-class classification). This study presents a systematic ablation study of three Graph Neural Network (GNN) architectures for drug-drug interaction (DDI) prediction on a publicly available benchmark dataset comprising 38,337 positive pairs across 86 interaction types. Three architectures are compared under identical training conditions (n = 61,339 pairs): a siamese dual Message Passing Neural Network (MPNN) with concatenation (Concat), a dual MPNN with four-head cross-attention (CrossAtt), and a ternary MPNN incorporating an interaction graph (Ternary). CrossAtt improves multi-class F1-macro by +0.186 absolute (+45%) over Concat, while improving binary AUC by only +0.012 (+1.3%) - confirming that atom-level inter-molecular communication specifically enables mechanism-type classification. The ternary architecture underperforms despite equivalent training data, with its failure consistent with a training instability hypothesis. Validation on ten acetylsali- cylic acid (ASA) drug pairs, held out prior to training, demonstrates 10/10 correct DDI-type predictions for CrossAtt versus 0/10 for Ternary. Two consistent failure cases are identified across all architectures, linking to structural limits established in a companion toxicity study.