Research Papers

The advancement of deep learning in human activity recognition (HAR) using 3D skeleton data is critical for applications in healthcare, security, sports, and human-computer interaction. This paper tackles a well-known gap in the field, which is the lack of testing in the applicability and reliability of XAI evaluation metrics in the skeleton-based HAR domain. We have tested established XAI metrics namely faithfulness and stability on Class Activation Mapping (CAM) and Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) to address this problem. The study also introduces a perturbation method that respects human biomechanical constraints to ensure realistic variations in human movement. Our findings indicate that \textit{faithfulness} may not be a reliable metric in certain contexts, such as with the EfficientGCN model. Conversely, stability emerges as a more dependable metric when there is slight input data perturbations. CAM and Grad-CAM are also found to produce almost identical explanations, leading to very similar XAI metric performance. This calls for the need for more diversified metrics and new XAI methods applied in skeleton-based HAR.

Facial expression recognition is vital for human behavior analysis, and deep learning has enabled models that can outperform humans. However, it is unclear how closely they mimic human processing. This study aims to explore the similarity between deep neural networks and human perception by comparing twelve different networks, including both general object classifiers and FER-specific models. We employ an innovative global explainable AI method to generate heatmaps, revealing crucial facial regions for the twelve networks trained on six facial expressions. We assess these results both quantitatively and qualitatively, comparing them to ground truth masks based on Friesen and Ekman's description and among them. We use Intersection over Union (IoU) and normalized correlation coefficients for comparisons. We generate 72 heatmaps to highlight critical regions for each expression and architecture. Qualitatively, models with pre-trained weights show more similarity in heatmaps compared to those without pre-training. Specifically, eye and nose areas influence certain facial expressions, while the mouth is consistently important across all models and expressions. Quantitatively, we find low average IoU values (avg. 0.2702) across all expressions and architectures. The best-performing architecture averages 0.3269, while the worst-performing one averages 0.2066. Dendrograms, built with the normalized correlation coefficient, reveal two main clusters for most expressions: models with pre-training and models without pre-training. Findings suggest limited alignment between human and AI facial expression recognition, with network architectures influencing the similarity, as similar architectures prioritize similar facial regions.

Towards Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): A Data Mining Perspective

Haoyi Xiong, Xuhong Li, Xiaofei Zhang +5

Given the complexity and lack of transparency in deep neural networks (DNNs), extensive efforts have been made to make these systems more interpretable or explain their behaviors in accessible terms. Unlike most reviews, which focus on algorithmic and model-centric perspectives, this work takes a "data-centric" view, examining how data collection, processing, and analysis contribute to explainable AI (XAI). We categorize existing work into three categories subject to their purposes: interpretations of deep models, referring to feature attributions and reasoning processes that correlate data points with model outputs; influences of training data, examining the impact of training data nuances, such as data valuation and sample anomalies, on decision-making processes; and insights of domain knowledge, discovering latent patterns and fostering new knowledge from data and models to advance social values and scientific discovery. Specifically, we distill XAI methodologies into data mining operations on training and testing data across modalities, such as images, text, and tabular data, as well as on training logs, checkpoints, models and other DNN behavior descriptors. In this way, our study offers a comprehensive, data-centric examination of XAI from a lens of data mining methods and applications.

The allure of aesthetic appeal in images captivates our senses, yet the underlying intricacies of aesthetic preferences remain elusive. In this study, we pioneer a novel perspective by utilizing several different machine learning (ML) models that focus on aesthetic attributes known to influence preferences. Our models process these attributes as inputs to predict the aesthetic scores of images. Moreover, to delve deeper and obtain interpretable explanations regarding the factors driving aesthetic preferences, we utilize the popular Explainable AI (XAI) technique known as SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Our methodology compares the performance of various ML models, including Random Forest, XGBoost, Support Vector Regression, and Multilayer Perceptron, in accurately predicting aesthetic scores, and consistently observing results in conjunction with SHAP. We conduct experiments on three image aesthetic benchmarks, namely Aesthetics with Attributes Database (AADB), Explainable Visual Aesthetics (EVA), and Personalized image Aesthetics database with Rich Attributes (PARA), providing insights into the roles of attributes and their interactions. Finally, our study presents ML models for aesthetics research, alongside the introduction of XAI. Our aim is to shed light on the complex nature of aesthetic preferences in images through ML and to provide a deeper understanding of the attributes that influence aesthetic judgements.

Forms of Understanding for XAI-Explanations

Hendrik Buschmeier, Heike M. Buhl, Friederike Kern +17

Explainability has become an important topic in computer science and artificial intelligence, leading to a subfield called Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). The goal of providing or seeking explanations is to achieve (better) 'understanding' on the part of the explainee. However, what it means to 'understand' is still not clearly defined, and the concept itself is rarely the subject of scientific investigation. This conceptual article aims to present a model of forms of understanding for XAI-explanations and beyond. From an interdisciplinary perspective bringing together computer science, linguistics, sociology, philosophy and psychology, a definition of understanding and its forms, assessment, and dynamics during the process of giving everyday explanations are explored. Two types of understanding are considered as possible outcomes of explanations, namely enabledness, 'knowing how' to do or decide something, and comprehension, 'knowing that' -- both in different degrees (from shallow to deep). Explanations regularly start with shallow understanding in a specific domain and can lead to deep comprehension and enabledness of the explanandum, which we see as a prerequisite for human users to gain agency. In this process, the increase of comprehension and enabledness are highly interdependent. Against the background of this systematization, special challenges of understanding in XAI are discussed.

When users receive either a positive or negative outcome from an automated system, Explainable AI (XAI) has almost exclusively focused on how to mutate negative outcomes into positive ones by crossing a decision boundary using counterfactuals (e.g., \textit{"If you earn 2k more, we will accept your loan application"}). Here, we instead focus on \textit{positive} outcomes, and take the novel step of using XAI to optimise them (e.g., \textit{"Even if you wish to half your down-payment, we will still accept your loan application"}). Explanations such as these that employ "even if..." reasoning, and do not cross a decision boundary, are known as semifactuals. To instantiate semifactuals in this context, we introduce the concept of \textit{Gain} (i.e., how much a user stands to benefit from the explanation), and consider the first causal formalisation of semifactuals. Tests on benchmark datasets show our algorithms are better at maximising gain compared to prior work, and that causality is important in the process. Most importantly however, a user study supports our main hypothesis by showing people find semifactual explanations more useful than counterfactuals when they receive the positive outcome of a loan acceptance.

Distributionally Robust Statistical Verification with Imprecise Neural Networks

Souradeep Dutta, Michele Caprio, Vivian Lin +5

A particularly challenging problem in AI safety is providing guarantees on the behavior of high-dimensional autonomous systems. Verification approaches centered around reachability analysis fail to scale, and purely statistical approaches are constrained by the distributional assumptions about the sampling process. Instead, we pose a distributionally robust version of the statistical verification problem for black-box systems, where our performance guarantees hold over a large family of distributions. This paper proposes a novel approach based on uncertainty quantification using concepts from imprecise probabilities. A central piece of our approach is an ensemble technique called Imprecise Neural Networks, which provides the uncertainty quantification. Additionally, we solve the allied problem of exploring the input set using active learning. The active learning uses an exhaustive neural-network verification tool Sherlock to collect samples. An evaluation on multiple physical simulators in the openAI gym Mujoco environments with reinforcement-learned controllers demonstrates that our approach can provide useful and scalable guarantees for high-dimensional systems.

In recent years the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become increasingly prevalent in a growing number of fields. As AI systems are being adopted in more high-stakes areas such as medicine and finance, ensuring that they are trustworthy is of increasing importance. A concern that is prominently addressed by the development and application of explainability methods, which are purported to increase trust from its users and wider society. While an increase in trust may be desirable, an analysis of literature from different research fields shows that an exclusive focus on increasing trust may not be warranted. Something which is well exemplified by the recent development in AI chatbots, which while highly coherent tend to make up facts. In this contribution, we investigate the concepts of trust, trustworthiness, and user reliance. In order to foster appropriate reliance on AI we need to prevent both disuse of these systems as well as overtrust. From our analysis of research on interpersonal trust, trust in automation, and trust in (X)AI, we identify the potential merit of the distinction between trust and distrust (in AI). We propose that alongside trust a healthy amount of distrust is of additional value for mitigating disuse and overtrust. We argue that by considering and evaluating both trust and distrust, we can ensure that users can rely appropriately on trustworthy AI, which can both be useful as well as fallible.

The Role of Subgroup Separability in Group-Fair Medical Image Classification

Charles Jones, Mélanie Roschewitz, Ben Glocker

We investigate performance disparities in deep classifiers. We find that the ability of classifiers to separate individuals into subgroups varies substantially across medical imaging modalities and protected characteristics; crucially, we show that this property is predictive of algorithmic bias. Through theoretical analysis and extensive empirical evaluation, we find a relationship between subgroup separability, subgroup disparities, and performance degradation when models are trained on data with systematic bias such as underdiagnosis. Our findings shed new light on the question of how models become biased, providing important insights for the development of fair medical imaging AI.

As debates on potential societal harm from artificial intelligence (AI) culminate in legislation and international norms, a global divide is emerging in both AI regulatory frameworks and international governance structures. In terms of local regulatory frameworks, the European Union (E.U.), Canada, and Brazil follow a horizontal or lateral approach that postulates the homogeneity of AI, seeks to identify common causes of harm, and demands uniform human interventions. In contrast, the United States (U.S.), the United Kingdom (U.K.), Israel, and Switzerland (and potentially China) have pursued a context-specific or modular approach, tailoring regulations to the specific use cases of AI systems. This paper argues for a context-specific approach to effectively address evolving risks in diverse mission-critical domains, while avoiding social costs associated with one-size-fits-all approaches. However, to enhance the systematicity and interoperability of international norms and accelerate global harmonization, this paper proposes an alternative contextual, coherent, and commensurable (3C) framework. To ensure contextuality, the framework (i) bifurcates the AI life cycle into two phases: learning and deployment for specific tasks, instead of defining foundation or general-purpose models; and (ii) categorizes these tasks based on their application and interaction with humans as follows: autonomous, discriminative (allocative, punitive, and cognitive), and generative AI. To ensure coherency, each category is assigned specific regulatory objectives replacing 2010s vintage AI ethics. To ensure commensurability, the framework promotes the adoption of international standards for measuring and mitigating risks.

Who's Thinking? A Push for Human-Centered Evaluation of LLMs using the XAI Playbook

Teresa Datta, John P. Dickerson

Deployed artificial intelligence (AI) often impacts humans, and there is no one-size-fits-all metric to evaluate these tools. Human-centered evaluation of AI-based systems combines quantitative and qualitative analysis and human input. It has been explored to some depth in the explainable AI (XAI) and human-computer interaction (HCI) communities. Gaps remain, but the basic understanding that humans interact with AI and accompanying explanations, and that humans' needs -- complete with their cognitive biases and quirks -- should be held front and center, is accepted by the community. In this paper, we draw parallels between the relatively mature field of XAI and the rapidly evolving research boom around large language models (LLMs). Accepted evaluative metrics for LLMs are not human-centered. We argue that many of the same paths tread by the XAI community over the past decade will be retread when discussing LLMs. Specifically, we argue that humans' tendencies -- again, complete with their cognitive biases and quirks -- should rest front and center when evaluating deployed LLMs. We outline three developed focus areas of human-centered evaluation of XAI: mental models, use case utility, and cognitive engagement, and we highlight the importance of exploring each of these concepts for LLMs. Our goal is to jumpstart human-centered LLM evaluation.

Blockchain technology has been successfully exploited for deploying new economic applications. However, it has started arousing the interest of malicious actors who deliver scams to deceive honest users and to gain economic advantages. Ponzi schemes are one of the most common scams. Here, we present a classifier for detecting smart Ponzi contracts on Ethereum, which can be used as the backbone for developing detection tools. First, we release a labelled data set with 4422 unique real-world smart contracts to address the problem of the unavailability of labelled data. Then, we show that our classifier outperforms the ones proposed in the literature when considering the AUC as a metric. Finally, we identify a small and effective set of features that ensures a good classification quality and investigate their impacts on the classification using eXplainable AI techniques.