ExplainabilityTransparencyTrustworthinesscs.LG
Choose Your Explanation: A Comparison of SHAP and GradCAM in Human Activity Recognition
Felix Tempel, Daniel Groos, Espen Alexander F. Ihlen, Lars Adde, Inga Strümke
December 20, 2024
Applied intelligence (Boston)
20 citations
1 influential
Key Takeaways
-
Different explanation methods serve different purposes: SHAP provides detailed attribution of individual input features, while Grad-CAM offers faster, spatially-oriented explanations. Organizations should choose based on their specific needs rather than assuming one method works universally.
-
Explanation method choice matters in healthcare applications: The study examined both methods on a cerebral palsy case, highlighting that in high-stakes medical domains, selecting the right explainability approach is critical for ensuring ethical and trustworthy AI predictions.
-
Speed versus detail involves trade-offs: Grad-CAM delivers explanations faster than SHAP, but with less granular detail about individual features. Decision-makers should consider whether their application prioritizes quick insights or comprehensive feature-level understanding.
-
Complementary rather than competing approaches: Rather than viewing SHAP and Grad-CAM as alternatives, the research suggests they are complementary tools that can be used together depending on application requirements, offering a more complete picture of model behavior.
-
Quantitative evaluation of explanations is necessary: The study used both quantitative and qualitative comparisons including perturbation experiments to assess explanation quality, demonstrating that responsible AI requires rigorous testing of explanation methods themselves—not just the underlying models.
Abstract
Explaining machine learning (ML) models using eXplainable AI (XAI) techniques has become essential to make them more transparent and trustworthy. This is especially important in high-stakes domains like healthcare, where understanding model decisions is critical to ensure ethical, sound, and trustworthy outcome predictions. However, users are often confused about which explanability method to choose for their specific use case. We present a comparative analysis of widely used explainability methods, Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) and Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM), within the domain of human activity recognition (HAR) utilizing graph convolutional networks (GCNs). By evaluating these methods on skeleton-based data from two real-world datasets, including a healthcare-critical cerebral palsy (CP) case, this study provides vital insights into both approaches' strengths, limitations, and differences, offering a roadmap for selecting the most appropriate explanation method based on specific models and applications. We quantitatively and quantitatively compare these methods, focusing on feature importance ranking, interpretability, and model sensitivity through perturbation experiments. While SHAP provides detailed input feature attribution, Grad-CAM delivers faster, spatially oriented explanations, making both methods complementary depending on the application's requirements. Given the importance of XAI in enhancing trust and transparency in ML models, particularly in sensitive environments like healthcare, our research demonstrates how SHAP and Grad-CAM could complement each other to provide more interpretable and actionable model explanations.
Paper Info
arXiv ID2412.16003
PublishedDecember 20, 2024
RevisedApril 13, 2025
Citations
20
Influential
1
Relevance82%
VenueApplied intelligence (Boston)
TypeJournalArticle
Categorycs.LG
Responsible AI Topics
ExplainabilityTransparencyTrustworthiness
Links
Citation data from Semantic Scholar