Research Papers

In explainable AI, Concept Activation Vectors (CAVs) are typically obtained by training linear classifier probes to detect human-understandable concepts as directions in the activation space of deep neural networks. It is widely assumed that a high probe accuracy indicates a CAV faithfully representing its target concept. However, we show that the probe's classification accuracy alone is an unreliable measure of concept alignment, i.e., the degree to which a CAV captures the intended concept. In fact, we argue that probes are more likely to capture spurious correlations than they are to represent only the intended concept. As part of our analysis, we demonstrate that deliberately misaligned probes constructed to exploit spurious correlations, achieve an accuracy close to that of standard probes. To address this severe problem, we introduce a novel concept localization method based on spatial linear attribution, and provide a comprehensive comparison of it to existing feature visualization techniques for detecting and mitigating concept misalignment. We further propose three classes of metrics for quantitatively assessing concept alignment: hard accuracy, segmentation scores, and augmentation robustness. Our analysis shows that probes with translation invariance and spatial alignment consistently increase concept alignment. These findings highlight the need for alignment-based evaluation metrics rather than probe accuracy, and the importance of tailoring probes to both the model architecture and the nature of the target concept.

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) underpin many modern computer vision systems. With applications ranging from common to critical areas, a need to explain and understand the model and its decisions (XAI) emerged. Prior works suggest that in the top layers of CNNs, the individual channels can be attributed to classifying human-understandable concepts. Concept relevance propagation (CRP) methods can backtrack predictions to these channels and find images that most activate these channels. However, current CRP workflows are largely manual: experts must inspect activation images to name the discovered concepts and must synthesize verbose explanations from relevance maps, limiting the accessibility of the explanations and their scalability. To address these issues, we introduce Large Language model EXplaIns COncept Relevance Propagation (LLEXICORP), a modular pipeline that couples CRP with a multimodal large language model. Our approach automatically assigns descriptive names to concept prototypes and generates natural-language explanations that translate quantitative relevance distributions into intuitive narratives. To ensure faithfulness, we craft prompts that teach the language model the semantics of CRP through examples and enforce a separation between naming and explanation tasks. The resulting text can be tailored to different audiences, offering low-level technical descriptions for experts and high-level summaries for non-technical stakeholders. We qualitatively evaluate our method on various images from ImageNet on a VGG16 model. Our findings suggest that integrating concept-based attribution methods with large language models can significantly lower the barrier to interpreting deep neural networks, paving the way for more transparent AI systems.

Explainable AI (XAI) is critical for building trust in complex machine learning models, yet mainstream attribution methods often provide an incomplete, static picture of a model's final state. By collapsing a feature's role into a single score, they are confounded by non-linearity and interactions. To address this, we introduce Feature-Function Curvature Analysis (FFCA), a novel framework that analyzes the geometry of a model's learned function. FFCA produces a 4-dimensional signature for each feature, quantifying its: (1) Impact, (2) Volatility, (3) Non-linearity, and (4) Interaction. Crucially, we extend this framework into Dynamic Archetype Analysis, which tracks the evolution of these signatures throughout the training process. This temporal view moves beyond explaining what a model learned to revealing how it learns. We provide the first direct, empirical evidence of hierarchical learning, showing that models consistently learn simple linear effects before complex interactions. Furthermore, this dynamic analysis provides novel, practical diagnostics for identifying insufficient model capacity and predicting the onset of overfitting. Our comprehensive experiments demonstrate that FFCA, through its static and dynamic components, provides the essential geometric context that transforms model explanation from simple quantification to a nuanced, trustworthy analysis of the entire learning process.

Despite their enormous predictive power, machine learning models are often unsuitable for applications in regulated industries such as finance, due to their limited capacity to provide explanations. While model-agnostic frameworks such as Shapley values have proved to be convenient and popular, they rarely align with the kinds of causal explanations that are typically sought after. Counterfactual case-based explanations, where an individual is informed of which circumstances would need to be different to cause a change in outcome, may be more intuitive and actionable. However, finding appropriate counterfactual cases is an open challenge, as is interpreting which features are most critical for the change in outcome. Here, we pose the question of counterfactual search and interpretation in terms of similarity learning, exploiting the representation learned by the random forest predictive model itself. Once a counterfactual is found, the feature importance of the explanation is computed as a function of which random forest partitions are crossed in order to reach it from the original instance. We demonstrate this method on both the MNIST hand-drawn digit dataset and the German credit dataset, finding that it generates explanations that are sparser and more useful than Shapley values.

Feature-attribution methods (e.g., SHAP, LIME) explain individual predictions but often miss higher-order structure: sets of features that act in concert. We propose Modules of Influence (MoI), a framework that (i) constructs a model explanation graph from per-instance attributions, (ii) applies community detection to find feature modules that jointly affect predictions, and (iii) quantifies how these modules relate to bias, redundancy, and causality patterns. Across synthetic and real datasets, MoI uncovers correlated feature groups, improves model debugging via module-level ablations, and localizes bias exposure to specific modules. We release stability and synergy metrics, a reference implementation, and evaluation protocols to benchmark module discovery in XAI.

Melanoma is one of the most aggressive and deadliest skin cancers, leading to mortality if not detected and treated in the early stages. Artificial intelligence techniques have recently been developed to help dermatologists in the early detection of melanoma, and systems based on deep learning (DL) have been able to detect these lesions with high accuracy. However, the entire community must overcome the explainability limit to get the maximum benefit from DL for diagnostics in the healthcare domain. Because of the black box operation's shortcomings in DL models' decisions, there is a lack of reliability and trust in the outcomes. However, Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) can solve this problem by interpreting the predictions of AI systems. This paper proposes a machine learning model using ensemble learning of three state-of-the-art deep transfer Learning networks, along with an approach to ensure the reliability of the predictions by utilizing XAI techniques to explain the basis of the predictions.

For doctors to truly trust artificial intelligence, it can't be a black box. They need to understand its reasoning, almost as if they were consulting a colleague. We created HistoLens1 to be that transparent, collaborative partner. It allows a pathologist to simply ask a question in plain English about a tissue slide--just as they would ask a trainee. Our system intelligently translates this question into a precise query for its AI engine, which then provides a clear, structured report. But it doesn't stop there. If a doctor ever asks, "Why?", HistoLens can instantly provide a 'visual proof' for any finding--a heatmap that points to the exact cells and regions the AI used for its analysis. We've also ensured the AI focuses only on the patient's tissue, just like a trained pathologist would, by teaching it to ignore distracting background noise. The result is a workflow where the pathologist remains the expert in charge, using a trustworthy AI assistant to verify their insights and make faster, more confident diagnoses.

Current quantum machine learning approaches often face challenges balancing predictive accuracy, robustness, and interpretability. To address this, we propose a novel quantum adversarial framework that integrates a hybrid quantum neural network (QNN) with classical deep learning layers, guided by an evaluator model with LIME-based interpretability, and extended through quantum GAN and self-supervised variants. In the proposed model, an adversarial evaluator concurrently guides the QNN by computing feedback loss, thereby optimizing both prediction accuracy and model explainability. Empirical evaluations show that the Vanilla model achieves RMSE = 0.27, MSE = 0.071, MAE = 0.21, and R^2 = 0.59, delivering the most consistent performance across regression metrics compared to adversarial counterparts. These results demonstrate the potential of combining quantum-inspired methods with classical architectures to develop lightweight, high-performance, and interpretable predictive models, advancing the applicability of QML beyond current limitations.

ProfileXAI is a model- and domain-agnostic framework that couples post-hoc explainers (SHAP, LIME, Anchor) with retrieval - augmented LLMs to produce explanations for different types of users. The system indexes a multimodal knowledge base, selects an explainer per instance via quantitative criteria, and generates grounded narratives with chat-enabled prompting. On Heart Disease and Thyroid Cancer datasets, we evaluate fidelity, robustness, parsimony, token use, and perceived quality. No explainer dominates: LIME achieves the best fidelity-robustness trade-off (Infidelity $\le 0.30$, $L<0.7$ on Heart Disease); Anchor yields the sparsest, low-token rules; SHAP attains the highest satisfaction ($\bar{x}=4.1$). Profile conditioning stabilizes tokens ($σ\le 13\%$) and maintains positive ratings across profiles ($\bar{x}\ge 3.7$, with domain experts at $3.77$), enabling efficient and trustworthy explanations.

Recent advances in finance-specific language models such as FinBERT have enabled the quantification of public sentiment into index-based measures, yet compressing diverse linguistic signals into single metrics overlooks contextual nuances and limits interpretability. To address this limitation, explainable AI techniques, particularly SHAP (SHapley Additive Explanations), have been employed to identify influential features. However, SHAP's computational cost grows exponentially with input features, making it impractical for large-scale text-based financial data. This study introduces a GRU-based forecasting framework enhanced with GroupSHAP, which quantifies contributions of semantically related keyword groups rather than individual tokens, substantially reducing computational burden while preserving interpretability. We employed FinBERT to embed news articles from 2015 to 2024, clustered them into coherent semantic groups, and applied GroupSHAP to measure each group's contribution to stock price movements. The resulting group-level SHAP variables across multiple topics were used as input features for the prediction model. Empirical results from one-day-ahead forecasting of the S&P 500 index throughout 2024 demonstrate that our approach achieves a 32.2% reduction in MAE and a 40.5% reduction in RMSE compared with benchmark models without the GroupSHAP mechanism. This research presents the first application of GroupSHAP in news-driven financial forecasting, showing that grouped sentiment representations simultaneously enhance interpretability and predictive performance.

Developing benchmark datasets for low-resource languages poses significant challenges, primarily due to the limited availability of native linguistic experts and the substantial time and cost involved in annotation. Given these challenges, Maithili is still underrepresented in natural language processing research. It is an Indo-Aryan language spoken by more than 13 million people in the Purvanchal region of India, valued for its rich linguistic structure and cultural significance. While sentiment analysis has achieved remarkable progress in high-resource languages, resources for low-resource languages, such as Maithili, remain scarce, often restricted to coarse-grained annotations and lacking interpretability mechanisms. To address this limitation, we introduce a novel dataset comprising 3,221 Maithili sentences annotated for sentiment polarity and accompanied by natural language justifications. Moreover, the dataset is carefully curated and validated by linguistic experts to ensure both label reliability and contextual fidelity. Notably, the justifications are written in Maithili, thereby promoting culturally grounded interpretation and enhancing the explainability of sentiment models. Furthermore, extensive experiments using both classical machine learning and state-of-the-art transformer architectures demonstrate the dataset's effectiveness for interpretable sentiment analysis. Ultimately, this work establishes the first benchmark for explainable affective computing in Maithili, thus contributing a valuable resource to the broader advancement of multilingual NLP and explainable AI.

Assessing the Real-World Utility of Explainable AI for Arousal Diagnostics: An Application-Grounded User Study

Stefan Kraft, Andreas Theissler, Vera Wienhausen-Wilke +2

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems increasingly match or surpass human experts in biomedical signal interpretation. However, their effective integration into clinical practice requires more than high predictive accuracy. Clinicians must discern \textit{when} and \textit{why} to trust algorithmic recommendations. This work presents an application-grounded user study with eight professional sleep medicine practitioners, who score nocturnal arousal events in polysomnographic data under three conditions: (i) manual scoring, (ii) black-box (BB) AI assistance, and (iii) transparent white-box (WB) AI assistance. Assistance is provided either from the \textit{start} of scoring or as a post-hoc quality-control (\textit{QC}) review. We systematically evaluate how the type and timing of assistance influence event-level and clinically most relevant count-based performance, time requirements, and user experience. When evaluated against the clinical standard used to train the AI, both AI and human-AI teams significantly outperform unaided experts, with collaboration also reducing inter-rater variability. Notably, transparent AI assistance applied as a targeted QC step yields median event-level performance improvements of approximately 30\% over black-box assistance, and QC timing further enhances count-based outcomes. While WB and QC approaches increase the time required for scoring, start-time assistance is faster and preferred by most participants. Participants overwhelmingly favor transparency, with seven out of eight expressing willingness to adopt the system with minor or no modifications. In summary, strategically timed transparent AI assistance effectively balances accuracy and clinical efficiency, providing a promising pathway toward trustworthy AI integration and user acceptance in clinical workflows.