Research Papers

Deep Learning (DL) models processing images to recognize the health state of large infrastructure components can exhibit biases and rely on non-causal shortcuts. eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) can address these issues but manually analyzing explanations generated by XAI techniques is time-consuming and prone to errors. This work proposes a novel framework that combines post-hoc explanations with semi-supervised learning to automatically identify anomalous explanations that deviate from those of correctly classified images and may therefore indicate model abnormal behaviors. This significantly reduces the workload for maintenance decision-makers, who only need to manually reclassify images flagged as having anomalous explanations. The proposed framework is applied to drone-collected images of insulator shells for power grid infrastructure monitoring, considering two different Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), GradCAM explanations and Deep Semi-Supervised Anomaly Detection. The average classification accuracy on two faulty classes is improved by 8% and maintenance operators are required to manually reclassify only 15% of the images. We compare the proposed framework with a state-of-the-art approach based on the faithfulness metric: the experimental results obtained demonstrate that the proposed framework consistently achieves F_1 scores larger than those of the faithfulness-based approach. Additionally, the proposed framework successfully identifies correct classifications that result from non-causal shortcuts, such as the presence of ID tags printed on insulator shells.

When asked to explain their decisions, LLMs can often give explanations which sound plausible to humans. But are these explanations faithful, i.e. do they convey the factors actually responsible for the decision? In this work, we analyse counterfactual faithfulness across 75 models from 13 families. We analyze the tradeoff between conciseness and comprehensiveness, how correlational faithfulness metrics assess this tradeoff, and the extent to which metrics can be gamed. This analysis motivates two new metrics: the phi-CCT, a simplified variant of the Correlational Counterfactual Test (CCT) which avoids the need for token probabilities while explaining most of the variance of the original test; and F-AUROC, which eliminates sensitivity to imbalanced intervention distributions and captures a model's ability to produce explanations with different levels of detail. Our findings reveal a clear scaling trend: larger and more capable models are consistently more faithful on all metrics we consider. Our code is available at https://github.com/google-deepmind/corr_faith.

Machine learning (ML) models serve as powerful tools for threat detection and mitigation; however, they also introduce potential new risks. Adversarial input can exploit these models through standard interfaces, thus creating new attack pathways that threaten critical network operations. As ML advancements progress, adversarial strategies become more advanced, and conventional defenses such as adversarial training are costly in computational terms and often fail to provide real-time detection. These methods typically require a balance between robustness and model performance, which presents challenges for applications that demand instant response. To further investigate this vulnerability, we suggest a novel strategy for detecting and mitigating adversarial attacks using eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). This approach is evaluated in real time within intrusion detection systems (IDS), leading to the development of a zero-touch mitigation strategy. Additionally, we explore various scenarios in the Radio Resource Control (RRC) layer within the Open Radio Access Network (O-RAN) framework, emphasizing the critical need for enhanced mitigation techniques to strengthen IDS defenses against advanced threats and implement a zero-touch mitigation solution. Extensive testing across different scenarios in the RRC layer of the O-RAN infrastructure validates the ability of the framework to detect and counteract integrated RRC-layer attacks when paired with adversarial strategies, emphasizing the essential need for robust defensive mechanisms to strengthen IDS against complex threats.

Over the past fifty years, numerous software defect prediction (SDP) approaches have been proposed. However, the ability to explain why predictors make certain predictions remains limited. Explainable SDP has emerged as a promising solution by using explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods to clarify the decision-making processes of predictors. Despite this progress, there is still significant potential to enhance the reliability of existing approaches. To address this limitation, we treat defect prediction and the corresponding interpretation as two distinct but closely related tasks and propose a joint learning framework that allows for the simultaneous training of the predictor and its interpreter. The novelty of our approach lies in two main aspects: 1. We design feedback loops that convey the decision-making logic from the predictor to the interpreter. This ensures a high level of conciseness in decision logic and feature engineering for both the predictor and the interpreter, enabling the interpreter to achieve reliable local and global interpretability. 2. We incorporate the interpretation results as a penalty term in the loss function of the joint-learning framework. This not only improves the accuracy of the predictor but also imposes a stronger constraint on the reliability of the interpreter. We validated our proposed method against several existing explainable SDPs across multiple datasets. The results demonstrate its effectiveness in both interpretation and defect prediction. The source code for the proposed method is available at: https://github.com/BugPredictor/software-defect-prediction.git

Explainable AI is increasingly employing argumentation methods to facilitate interactive explanations between AI agents and human users. While existing approaches typically rely on predetermined human user models, there remains a critical gap in dynamically learning and updating these models during interactions. In this paper, we present a framework that enables AI agents to adapt their understanding of human users through argumentation-based dialogues. Our approach, called Persona, draws on prospect theory and integrates a probability weighting function with a Bayesian belief update mechanism that refines a probability distribution over possible human models based on exchanged arguments. Through empirical evaluations with human users in an applied argumentation setting, we demonstrate that Persona effectively captures evolving human beliefs, facilitates personalized interactions, and outperforms state-of-the-art methods.

Explanations of Large Language Models Explain Language Representations in the Brain

Maryam Rahimi, Mohammad Reza Daliri, Yadollah Yaghoobzadeh

Large Language Model (LLM) representations are known to align with brain activity during language processing, but it remains unclear what drives this alignment. We test whether explainable AI (XAI) can help answer this: using attribution methods, we quantify the contribution of each input word to an LLM's next-word predictions and use these explanations to predict fMRI data from participants listening to narratives. We find that gradient-based attribution methods robustly align with brain activity, contribute unique variance beyond acoustic and word-rate confounds, and outperform internal representations in early auditory regions. Using conductance, we extend attribution from words to individual layers, asking what each layer's attribution reveals about the model's computation and how this relates to its brain alignment. Early layers show greater word-type sensitivity and align preferentially with auditory regions, whereas the final layer's attribution is dominated by positional information and exhibits broad cortical alignment. Together, these findings demonstrate that attribution-based explanations can be used not only to measure LLM--brain alignment but to characterize what it reflects.

xai_evals : A Framework for Evaluating Post-Hoc Local Explanation Methods

Pratinav Seth, Yashwardhan Rathore, Neeraj Kumar Singh +2

The growing complexity of machine learning and deep learning models has led to an increased reliance on opaque "black box" systems, making it difficult to understand the rationale behind predictions. This lack of transparency is particularly challenging in high-stakes applications where interpretability is as important as accuracy. Post-hoc explanation methods are commonly used to interpret these models, but they are seldom rigorously evaluated, raising concerns about their reliability. The Python package xai_evals addresses this by providing a comprehensive framework for generating, benchmarking, and evaluating explanation methods across both tabular and image data modalities. It integrates popular techniques like SHAP, LIME, Grad-CAM, Integrated Gradients (IG), and Backtrace, while supporting evaluation metrics such as faithfulness, sensitivity, and robustness. xai_evals enhances the interpretability of machine learning models, fostering transparency and trust in AI systems. The library is open-sourced at https://pypi.org/project/xai-evals/ .

Towards Unified Attribution in Explainable AI, Data-Centric AI, and Mechanistic Interpretability

Shichang Zhang, Tessa Han, Usha Bhalla +1

The increasing complexity of AI systems has made understanding their behavior critical. Numerous interpretability methods have been developed to attribute model behavior to three key aspects: input features, training data, and internal model components, which emerged from explainable AI, data-centric AI, and mechanistic interpretability, respectively. However, these attribution methods are studied and applied rather independently, resulting in a fragmented landscape of methods and terminology. This position paper argues that feature, data, and component attribution methods share fundamental similarities, and a unified view of them benefits both interpretability and broader AI research. To this end, we first analyze popular methods for these three types of attributions and present a unified view demonstrating that these seemingly distinct methods employ similar techniques (such as perturbations, gradients, and linear approximations) over different aspects and thus differ primarily in their perspectives rather than techniques. Then, we demonstrate how this unified view enhances understanding of existing attribution methods, highlights shared concepts and evaluation criteria among these methods, and leads to new research directions both in interpretability research, by addressing common challenges and facilitating cross-attribution innovation, and in AI more broadly, with applications in model editing, steering, and regulation.

Facial expression recognition (FER) has emerged as a promising approach to the development of emotion-aware intelligent agents and systems. However, key challenges remain in utilizing FER in real-world contexts, including ensuring user understanding and establishing a suitable level of user trust. We developed a novel explanation method utilizing Facial Action Units (FAUs) to explain the output of a FER model through both textual and visual modalities. We conducted an empirical user study evaluating user understanding and trust, comparing our approach to state-of-the-art eXplainable AI (XAI) methods. Our results indicate that visual AND textual as well as textual-only FAU-based explanations resulted in better user understanding of the FER model. We also show that all modalities of FAU-based methods improved appropriate trust of the users towards the FER model.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising capabilities in visually interpreting medical time-series data. However, their general-purpose design can limit domain-specific precision, and the proprietary nature of many models poses challenges for fine-tuning on specialized clinical datasets. Conversely, small specialized models (SSMs) offer strong performance on focused tasks but lack the broader reasoning needed for complex medical decision-making. To address these complementary limitations, we introduce \ConMIL{} (Conformalized Multiple Instance Learning), a novel decision-support framework distinctively synergizes three key components: (1) a new Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) mechanism, QTrans-Pooling, designed for per-class interpretability in identifying clinically relevant physiological signal segments; (2) conformal prediction, integrated with MIL to generate calibrated, set-valued outputs with statistical reliability guarantees; and (3) a structured approach for these interpretable and uncertainty-quantified SSM outputs to enhance the visual inspection capabilities of LLMs. Our experiments on arrhythmia detection and sleep stage classification demonstrate that \ConMIL{} can enhance the accuracy of LLMs such as ChatGPT4.0, Qwen2-VL-7B, and MiMo-VL-7B-RL. For example, \ConMIL{}-supported Qwen2-VL-7B and MiMo-VL-7B-RL both achieves 94.92% and 96.82% precision on confident samples and (70.61% and 78.02%)/(78.10% and 71.98%) on uncertain samples for the two tasks, compared to 46.13% and 13.16% using the LLM alone. These results suggest that integrating task-specific models with LLMs may offer a promising pathway toward more interpretable and trustworthy AI-driven clinical decision support.

Improved Detection and Diagnosis of Faults in Deep Neural Networks Using Hierarchical and Explainable Classification

Sigma Jahan, Mehil B Shah, Parvez Mahbub +1

Deep Neural Networks (DNN) have found numerous applications in various domains, including fraud detection, medical diagnosis, facial recognition, and autonomous driving. However, DNN-based systems often suffer from reliability issues due to their inherent complexity and the stochastic nature of their underlying models. Unfortunately, existing techniques to detect faults in DNN programs are either limited by the types of faults (e.g., hyperparameter or layer) they support or the kind of information (e.g., dynamic or static) they use. As a result, they might fall short of comprehensively detecting and diagnosing the faults. In this paper, we present DEFault (Detect and Explain Fault) -- a novel technique to detect and diagnose faults in DNN programs. It first captures dynamic (i.e., runtime) features during model training and leverages a hierarchical classification approach to detect all major fault categories from the literature. Then, it captures static features (e.g., layer types) from DNN programs and leverages explainable AI methods (e.g., SHAP) to narrow down the root cause of the fault. We train and evaluate DEFault on a large, diverse dataset of ~14.5K DNN programs and further validate our technique using a benchmark dataset of 52 real-life faulty DNN programs. Our approach achieves ~94% recall in detecting real-world faulty DNN programs and ~63% recall in diagnosing the root causes of the faults, demonstrating 3.92% - 11.54% higher performance than that of state-of-the-art techniques. Thus, DEFault has the potential to significantly improve the reliability of DNN programs by effectively detecting and diagnosing the faults.

Long-form mental health assessments pose unique challenges for large language models (LLMs), which often exhibit hallucinations or inconsistent reasoning when handling extended, domain-specific contexts. We introduce Stacked Multi-Model Reasoning (SMMR), a layered framework that leverages multiple LLMs and specialized smaller models as coequal 'experts'. Early layers isolate short, discrete subtasks, while later layers integrate and refine these partial outputs through more advanced long-context models. We evaluate SMMR on the DAIC-WOZ depression-screening dataset and 48 curated case studies with psychiatric diagnoses, demonstrating consistent improvements over single-model baselines in terms of accuracy, F1-score, and PHQ-8 error reduction. By harnessing diverse 'second opinions', SMMR mitigates hallucinations, captures subtle clinical nuances, and enhances reliability in high-stakes mental health assessments. Our findings underscore the value of multi-expert frameworks for more trustworthy AI-driven screening.