Research Papers

Hybrid interpretable models combine a transparent component with a black-box model by assigning some examples to the former and deferring the rest to the latter. While this design enables flexible tradeoffs between accuracy and interpretability, it also raises a distinct procedural fairness concern: some demographic groups may systematically receive interpretable decisions, while others are disproportionately routed to a black box. We formalize this issue as Interpretability Coverage Disparity (ICD), a demographic-parity-style measure applied to the routing decision of hybrid interpretable models. Using tools from predictive multiplicity, we study ICD across four hybrid interpretable learning methods, three standard fairness benchmark datasets, and multiple sensitive attributes. Our experiments reveal substantial ICD in intermediate transparency regimes, where both the interpretable and black-box components are actively used. We further show that simple coverage-disparity constraints can significantly reduce ICD in exact hybrid learning methods, with marginal impact on accuracy and sparsity. In several settings, ICD mitigation also improves standard algorithmic fairness metrics. These results show that hybrid interpretable models should be audited not only for predictive fairness, but also for how they allocate interpretability across individuals and groups.

Recent advances in deep learning have enabled increasingly accurate electroencephalography (EEG)-based classification of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), but the decision-making processes of high-capacity models remain difficult to interpret. This study investigates multiple post-hoc explainability methods applied to an InceptionTime architecture trained for EEG-based MDD detection. The analysis includes Shapley-based, gradient-based, and perturbation-based attribution approaches: DeepSHAP, Integrated Gradients, GradCAM, Occlusion, and Permutation Feature Importance. Explainability analysis was performed within a subject-level stratified 5-fold cross-validation framework using global attribution aggregation across EEG segments and subjects. The evaluated methods revealed partially convergent attribution patterns, with recurring emphasis on frontal, temporal, and posterior EEG regions, particularly in the right hemisphere. Quantitative comparison demonstrated substantial agreement between gradient- and perturbation-based approaches, while DeepSHAP produced comparatively distinct attribution distributions. At the same time, variability between explainability methods highlighted the influence of methodological assumptions on the resulting explanations. Overall, the results suggest that different post-hoc explainability approaches capture partially overlapping relevance structures in EEG-based deep learning models for depression detection. Although the observed attribution patterns are broadly consistent with several previous EEG studies of MDD, the analysis should be interpreted as exploratory rather than evidence of definitive neurophysiological biomarkers or clinical applicability. The study highlights both the usefulness and limitations of post-hoc explainability for interpreting black-box EEG classifiers in psychiatric applications.

Parallel Adaptive Multi-Objective Evolutionary Learning of Discretized Bayesian Network Classifiers for Clinical Data

Damy M. F. Ha, Thalea Schlender, Yvette M. van der Linden +2

Bayesian Networks (BNs) are of interest from an explainable AI viewpoint, offering transparent probabilistic models for decision support. Baymex is a recently introduced multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for learning discretized BNs, enabling experts to trade-off different objectives of interest, such as likelihood, model complexity, and prior beliefs. While Baymex has been shown to outperform state-of-the-art BN learning approaches, Baymex still 1) requires a lot of computation time and 2) has only been evaluated on synthetic data. To improve scalability, we introduce a parallelization strategy as well as a mechanism that enables adaptively steering optimization toward networks that overfit less. We furthermore reconfigure Baymex to train a BN classifier through multi-objective optimization of cross-entropy loss and the BIC complexity term so as to evaluate its performance on real-world clinical classification tasks. Besides observing speedups up to over 54 times on a 16-core CPU, comparisons against clinically familiar baselines (decision trees, logistic regression, naive Bayes, and random forests) on two open-source (RADCURE and SUPPORT) and one in-house dataset, show that Baymex obtains statistically similar or better predictive performance while producing compact, clinically inspectable BNs. Importantly, Baymex finds multiple plausible BN classifiers that contain predictors consistent with established clinical factors.

Online recruitment platforms require recommendation methods capable of retrieving relevant job opportunities from large and heterogeneous collections of job postings. Keyword-based search is efficient and interpretable, but it may fail to retrieve relevant postings when equivalent roles are expressed using different terminology. This study presents a metadata-driven job recommendation system that combines TF-IDF lexical matching, Sentence-BERT semantic retrieval, query-aware filtering, optional Cross-Encoder re-ranking, and explanation generation. The proposed system utilizes structured metadata fields including job title, company name, location, seniority level, job function, employment type, and industry without relying on full job descriptions or user interaction histories. Experiments conducted on a cleaned LinkedIn job posting dataset containing 31262 records demonstrate that the best hybrid configuration achieved a Precision at 10 score of 0.8032 and an nDCG at 10 score of 0.9496. Under the internal evaluation protocol, Cross-Encoder re-ranking improved Precision at 10 from 0.7896 to 0.7948 and nDCG at 10 from 0.9666 to 0.9739. These findings indicate that lexical and semantic retrieval techniques can be effectively combined to provide explainable job recommendations when only structured metadata is available.

The widespread integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) necessitates rigorous and systematic safety evaluation. Existing paradigms either rely on constructed benchmarks to assess safety from predefined perspectives, or employ dynamic red-teaming to probe potential vulnerabilities. While effective, these approaches face challenges, as they depend heavily on expert domain knowledge, offer limited systematic guarantees, and are vulnerable to rapid obsolescence. To address these limitations, we introduce a novel framework POLARIS that brings the rigor of specification-based software testing to AI safety. POLARIS first compiles unstructured natural-language policies into First-Order Logic (FOL) representations, establishing a traceable link between high-level rules and concrete test cases. This formalization enables the construction of a Semantic Policy Graph, where complex policy violation scenarios are encoded as traversable paths. By systematically exploring this graph, POLARIS uncovers compositional violation patterns, which are then instantiated into executable natural-language test queries, enabling coverage-driven and reproducible safety testing. Experiments demonstrate that POLARIS achieves higher policy coverage and attack success counts compared to established baselines. Crucially, by bridging formal methods and AI safety, POLARIS provides a principled, automated approach to ensuring LLMs adhere to safety-critical policies with verifiable traceability. We release our code at https://github.com/huac-lxy/POLARIS.

Retinal imaging provides a non-invasive window into systemic microvascular health and has emerged as a potential biomarker for systemic diseases. However, whether retinal features encode biologically meaningful systemic signals that can be reliably interpreted using explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) remains unclear. An explainable multi-task deep learning framework was developed to investigate associations between retinal microvascular features and systemic abnormalities in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. A total of 11,011 fundus images from 2,719 individuals were analysed using a shared neural network with task-specific heads for glycaemic status, kidney abnormality, and multi-system involvement. Model interpretability was evaluated using Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM), anatomical masking, and vessel alignment analysis. The framework demonstrated task-dependent predictive performance, with the best discrimination observed for kidney abnormality (AUC up to 0.63), whereas glycaemic status prediction showed limited performance (AUC = 0.49-0.61). Explainability analyses consistently localized model attention to retinal vessels and peripapillary regions. Masking experiments showed that occlusion of vascular regions caused the greatest performance decline, indicating that retinal vessels were the primary predictive source. Different architectures exhibited heterogeneous attention patterns, suggesting multiple representational pathways for systemic signal encoding. This pilot study demonstrates that retinal microvascular features contain measurable signals associated with systemic abnormalities, particularly microvascular damage. By integrating multi-task learning with quantitative XAI validation, this framework advances retinal imaging toward interpretable digital biomarkers for systemic risk stratification in diabetes.

Concerns about algorithmic bias and fairness have increased as artificial intelligence has been incorporated into high-stakes decision-making. Traditional Naive Bayes classifiers, while efficient and interpretable, lack fairness-awareness mechanisms and perpetuate historical biases in sensitive domains such as hiring, credit scoring, and criminal justice. This study develops a fairness-aware extension of the Naive Bayes classifier that mitigates bias while maintaining computational efficiency. We propose the Bias Mitigating Naive Bayes (BMNB) classifier, integrating in-processing and post-processing interventions. The in-processing stage employs a blended likelihood approach combining group-specific and pooled likelihood estimates through a tunable blending parameter alpha to balance fairness and accuracy. The post-processing stage applies output calibration with adaptive thresholding to fine-tune group-specific decision boundaries. Experimental results indicate that BMNB attains Disparate Impact (DI) values of 1.000, 1.171, and 0.997 and Equal Opportunity Difference (EOD) values of -0.217, -0.226, and -0.053 on the Adult, ProPublica, and Framingham datasets, respectively, while maintaining computational efficiency. Ablation studies confirm that the combination of blended likelihood and adaptive thresholding yields superior performance compared to either technique in isolation.

Real-World Data (RWD), with its large sample sizes and rich clinical detail, offers a compelling alternative to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for studying treatment effects in diverse and complex patient populations. However, its observational nature introduces confounding that prevents straightforward comparative effectiveness research. Target trial emulation leverages RWD to estimate average treatment effects (ATE) at the population scale and diversity that RCTs cannot achieve, yet its validity depends critically on unbiased ATE estimation under high-dimensional confounding. Many causal inference pipelines address high-dimensional confounding through machine learning and artificial intelligence (ML/AI) outcome regression. However, commonly used ML/AI regression models exhibit systematic prediction bias, with predicted outcomes shrinking toward the marginal outcome mean. This structural bias propagates into ATE estimation and cannot be corrected by cross-fitting, ensemble methods, or any standard ML practice. In this work, we first quantitatively characterize how systematic prediction bias in ML/AI outcome regression leads to biased ATE estimates in causal inference models. We further propose an unbiased ML/AI regression-based causal inference framework to ensure unbiased ATE estimation for observational studies. We demonstrate our approach by studying the effects of opioids on cardiovascular health in patients with chronic pain using UK Biobank data.

While large-scale models such as LLMs and diffusion models have achieved practical success, public institutions have emphasized the importance of explainability in AI. Existing methods for explaining AI, however, are not designed to provide completely faithful explanations of the behavior of large-scale AI systems. Although a completely faithful and interpretable explanation of the behavior of an AI system might be useful for AI governance, it has not been known whether providing such an explanation is theoretically possible. In this paper, we mathematically prove a fundamental quadrilemma in explaining AI, stating that AI and its explanation cannot satisfy the following four conditions simultaneously: 1) the complexity of the operation environment, 2) the goodness of the AI's performance, 3) the interpretability of the AI's explanation, and 4) the complete faithfulness of the AI's explanation. This quadrilemma suggests that, in most applications where we cannot change the environment or sacrifice good AI performance and an interpretable explanation, we should give up complete faithfulness of explanations and should instead aim to explain only the parts that are important for applications. As a consequence, the quadrilemma implies that AI governance should be designed on the premise that the faithfulness of AI explanations is always incomplete.

Classical reinforcement learning assumes the agent interacts with a fixed environment whose behavior does not depend on the agent's policy. This assumption breaks down in non-realizable settings where other actors might anticipate the agent's behavior, including environments crucial to AI safety, where the agent interacts with predictors, humans, other AI agents, and institutions. In such settings, the agent's model class fails to capture the world in which it operates. Under such misspecification, classical Bayesian methods can produce confidently wrong posteriors, unreliable decisions, and unbounded regret, as realizability fails to obtain. Infra-Bayesianism is a decision-theoretic framework that addresses these failures by distinguishing ordinary probabilistic uncertainty, where priors can be reasonably chosen, from Knightian uncertainty, where no grounds exist for the construction of such a prior. It does so by evaluating actions on their worst-case outcomes, rather than from posterior expectations or weighted averaging. We present the first proof-of-concept implementation of an infra-Bayesian reinforcement learning architecture for finite-outcome stateless decision problems. Our agent maintains a set of imprecise hypotheses, updates them using infra-Bayesian conditioning, and selects actions by maximizing worst-case expected value. We apply this implementation of the infra-Bayesian maximin decision process to an environment with Knightian uncertainty, and demonstrate a lower worst-case regret as compared to classical reinforcement learning agents. We also investigate Newcomb's problem and show that the infra-Bayesian agent picks the optimal strategy, outperforming classical decision theory agents. Our results provide a step towards reinforcement learning agents that remain robust under model misspecification and policy-dependent uncertainty.

AI-enabled services deployed in critical digital infrastructure are subject to governance obligations spanning transparency, accountability, fairness, and traceability. Compliance today remains documentation-centric: obligations are described in prose, audits rely on static checklists, and verification depends on manual review. Such approaches do not scale to automated AI systems. This paper introduces Ontological Knowledge Blocks (OKBs), a programmable governance infrastructure that compiles regulatory obligations into machine-checkable constraints over structured evidence graphs. We formalize an OKB as a 5-tuple that binds normative obligations to an RDF/OWL concept schema, executable SHACL validation rules, explicit evidence requirements, and PROV-O provenance links. A deterministic regulatory compiler translates structured Intermediate Representation (IR) records into composable KB modules, enabling profile-based governance reconfiguration without modifying service code. We implement two prototypes and evaluate them in an AI-assisted HPC resource allocation scenario across 24 validation runs and four governance profiles. Results demonstrate profile-sensitive validation, strictly additive violation accumulation, SHACL validation latency between 12.6 ms and 100.3 ms, and profile equivalence testing confirming Combined as the strictly most comprehensive profile. All artefacts are released as open source.

Illegal content reporting mechanisms are a key technical and organizational measure through which online platforms address illegal content under the European Union Digital Services Act (DSA). Article 16 requires user notices to be sufficiently substantiated and submitted in good faith, placing users in the difficult position of interpreting legal and procedural language and translating ambiguous content into legally meaningful categories and reasons. We investigate how large language model (LLM)-based assistants can support this reporting process. In a controlled user study (N = 450) using an interface modeled on a major platform reporting workflow, we compare three conditions: unaided reporting, a conventional explainable AI assistant (XAI) that suggests a single legal category with a rationale, and an evaluative AI assistant (EvalAI) that presents balanced pro and con arguments across candidate legal provisions. We further examine these assistance forms under systematically varied AI error regimes. Our results show that EvalAI improves provision-level accuracy under AI error and reduces misclassification distance relative to conventional XAI, particularly for near-miss and overbreadth errors. When AI output is correct, conventional XAI enables faster decisions, but neither AI assistance form reliably improves the quality of users' substantiated explanations relative to unaided reporting. We discuss design implications for compliance-oriented reporting interfaces, highlighting trade-offs between accuracy, deliberation, explanation quality, and vulnerability to misleading AI output.