Research Papers

Black-box machine learning models are being used in more and more high-stakes domains, which creates a growing need for Explainable AI (XAI). Unfortunately, the use of XAI in machine learning introduces new privacy risks, which currently remain largely unnoticed. We introduce the explanation linkage attack, which can occur when deploying instance-based strategies to find counterfactual explanations. To counter such an attack, we propose k-anonymous counterfactual explanations and introduce pureness as a new metric to evaluate the validity of these k-anonymous counterfactual explanations. Our results show that making the explanations, rather than the whole dataset, k- anonymous, is beneficial for the quality of the explanations.

SAFARI: Versatile and Efficient Evaluations for Robustness of Interpretability

Wei Huang, Xingyu Zhao, Gaojie Jin +1

Interpretability of Deep Learning (DL) is a barrier to trustworthy AI. Despite great efforts made by the Explainable AI (XAI) community, explanations lack robustness -- indistinguishable input perturbations may lead to different XAI results. Thus, it is vital to assess how robust DL interpretability is, given an XAI method. In this paper, we identify several challenges that the state-of-the-art is unable to cope with collectively: i) existing metrics are not comprehensive; ii) XAI techniques are highly heterogeneous; iii) misinterpretations are normally rare events. To tackle these challenges, we introduce two black-box evaluation methods, concerning the worst-case interpretation discrepancy and a probabilistic notion of how robust in general, respectively. Genetic Algorithm (GA) with bespoke fitness function is used to solve constrained optimisation for efficient worst-case evaluation. Subset Simulation (SS), dedicated to estimate rare event probabilities, is used for evaluating overall robustness. Experiments show that the accuracy, sensitivity, and efficiency of our methods outperform the state-of-the-arts. Finally, we demonstrate two applications of our methods: ranking robust XAI methods and selecting training schemes to improve both classification and interpretation robustness.

AI explainability improves the transparency of models, making them more trustworthy. Such goals are motivated by the emergence of deep learning models, which are obscure by nature; even in the domain of images, where deep learning has succeeded the most, explainability is still poorly assessed. In the field of image recognition many feature attribution methods have been proposed with the purpose of explaining a model's behavior using visual cues. However, no metrics have been established so far to assess and select these methods objectively. In this paper we propose a consistent evaluation score for feature attribution methods -- the Focus -- designed to quantify their coherency to the task. While most previous work adds out-of-distribution noise to samples, we introduce a methodology to add noise from within the distribution. This is done through mosaics of instances from different classes, and the explanations these generate. On those, we compute a visual pseudo-precision metric, Focus. First, we show the robustness of the approach through a set of randomization experiments. Then we use Focus to compare six popular explainability techniques across several CNN architectures and classification datasets. Our results find some methods to be consistently reliable (LRP, GradCAM), while others produce class-agnostic explanations (SmoothGrad, IG). Finally we introduce another application of Focus, using it for the identification and characterization of biases found in models. This empowers bias-management tools, in another small step towards trustworthy AI.

The reasonable definition of semantic interpretability presents the core challenge in explainable AI. This paper proposes a method to modify a traditional convolutional neural network (CNN) into an interpretable compositional CNN, in order to learn filters that encode meaningful visual patterns in intermediate convolutional layers. In a compositional CNN, each filter is supposed to consistently represent a specific compositional object part or image region with a clear meaning. The compositional CNN learns from image labels for classification without any annotations of parts or regions for supervision. Our method can be broadly applied to different types of CNNs. Experiments have demonstrated the effectiveness of our method.

We investigated the data-driven relationship between features in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and the overall and 5-year survival in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and non-TNBC (NTNBC) patients by using Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) models. We used clinical information from patients with invasive breast carcinoma from The Cancer Genome Atlas and from two studies from the cbioPortal, the PanCanAtlas project and the GDAC Firehose study. In this study, we used a normalized RNA sequencing data-driven cohort from 1,015 breast cancer patients, alive or deceased, from the UCSC Xena data set and performed integrated deconvolution with the EPIC method to estimate the percentage of seven different immune and stromal cells from RNA sequencing data. Novel insights derived from our XAI model showed that CD4+ T cells and B cells are more critical than other TME features for enhanced prognosis for both TNBC and NTNBC patients. Our XAI model revealed the critical inflection points (i.e., threshold fractions) of CD4+ T cells and B cells above or below which 5-year survival rates improve. Subsequently, we ascertained the conditional probabilities of $\geq$ 5-year survival in both TNBC and NTNBC patients under specific conditions inferred from the inflection points. In particular, the XAI models revealed that a B-cell fraction exceeding 0.018 in the TME could ensure 100% 5-year survival for NTNBC patients. The findings from this research could lead to more accurate clinical predictions and enhanced immunotherapies and to the design of innovative strategies to reprogram the TME of breast cancer patients.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) holds great promise for transforming healthcare, particularly in disease diagnosis, prognosis, and patient care. The increasing availability of digital medical data, such as images, omics, biosignals, and electronic health records, combined with advances in computing, has enabled AI models to approach expert-level performance. However, widespread clinical adoption remains limited, primarily due to challenges beyond technical performance, including ethical concerns, regulatory barriers, and lack of trust. To address these issues, AI systems must align with the principles of Trustworthy AI (TAI), which emphasize human agency and oversight, algorithmic robustness, privacy and data governance, transparency, bias and discrimination avoidance, and accountability. Yet, the complexity of healthcare processes (e.g., screening, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment) and the diversity of stakeholders (clinicians, patients, providers, regulators) complicate the integration of TAI principles. To bridge the gap between TAI theory and practical implementation, this paper proposes a design framework to support developers in embedding TAI principles into medical AI systems. Thus, for each stakeholder identified across various healthcare processes, we propose a disease-agnostic collection of requirements that medical AI systems should incorporate to adhere to the principles of TAI. Additionally, we examine the challenges and tradeoffs that may arise when applying these principles in practice. To ground the discussion, we focus on cardiovascular diseases, a field marked by both high prevalence and active AI innovation, and demonstrate how TAI principles have been applied and where key obstacles persist.

This study critically examines the commonly held assumption that explicability in artificial intelligence (AI) systems inherently boosts user trust. Utilizing a meta-analytical approach, we conducted a comprehensive examination of the existing literature to explore the relationship between AI explainability and trust. Our analysis, incorporating data from 90 studies, reveals a statistically significant but moderate positive correlation between the explainability of AI systems and the trust they engender among users. This indicates that while explainability contributes to building trust, it is not the sole or predominant factor in this equation. In addition to academic contributions to the field of Explainable AI (XAI), this research highlights its broader socio-technical implications, particularly in promoting accountability and fostering user trust in critical domains such as healthcare and justice. By addressing challenges like algorithmic bias and ethical transparency, the study underscores the need for equitable and sustainable AI adoption. Rather than focusing solely on immediate trust, we emphasize the normative importance of fostering authentic and enduring trustworthiness in AI systems.

Today, crop diversification in agriculture is a critical issue to meet the increasing demand for food and improve food safety and quality. This issue is considered to be the most important challenge for the next generation of agriculture due to the diminishing natural resources, the limited arable land, and unpredictable climatic conditions caused by climate change. In this paper, we employ emerging technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), machine learning (ML), and explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to improve operational efficiency and productivity in the agricultural sector. Specifically, we propose an edge computing-based explainable crop recommendation system, AgroXAI, which suggests suitable crops for a region based on weather and soil conditions. In this system, we provide local and global explanations of ML model decisions with methods such as ELI5, LIME, SHAP, which we integrate into ML models. More importantly, we provide regional alternative crop recommendations with the counterfactual explainability method. In this way, we envision that our proposed AgroXAI system will be a platform that provides regional crop diversity in the next generation agriculture.

The adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in retail has significantly transformed the industry, enabling more personalized services and efficient operations. However, the rapid implementation of AI technologies raises ethical concerns, particularly regarding consumer privacy and fairness. This study aims to analyze the ethical challenges of AI applications in retail, explore ways retailers can implement AI technologies ethically while remaining competitive, and provide recommendations on ethical AI practices. A descriptive survey design was used to collect data from 300 respondents across major e-commerce platforms. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including percentages and mean scores. Findings shows a high level of concerns among consumers regarding the amount of personal data collected by AI-driven retail applications, with many expressing a lack of trust in how their data is managed. Also, fairness is another major issue, as a majority believe AI systems do not treat consumers equally, raising concerns about algorithmic bias. It was also found that AI can enhance business competitiveness and efficiency without compromising ethical principles, such as data privacy and fairness. Data privacy and transparency were highlighted as critical areas where retailers need to focus their efforts, indicating a strong demand for stricter data protection protocols and ongoing scrutiny of AI systems. The study concludes that retailers must prioritize transparency, fairness, and data protection when deploying AI systems. The study recommends ensuring transparency in AI processes, conducting regular audits to address biases, incorporating consumer feedback in AI development, and emphasizing consumer data privacy.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a widely developed and adopted technology across entire industry sectors. Integrating environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations with AI investments is crucial for ensuring ethical and sustainable technological advancement. Particularly from an investor perspective, this integration not only mitigates risks but also enhances long-term value creation by aligning AI initiatives with broader societal goals. Yet, this area has been less explored in both academia and industry. To bridge the gap, we introduce a novel ESG-AI framework, which is developed based on insights from engagements with 28 companies and comprises three key components. The framework provides a structured approach to this integration, developed in collaboration with industry practitioners. The ESG-AI framework provides an overview of the environmental and social impacts of AI applications, helping users such as investors assess the materiality of AI use. Moreover, it enables investors to evaluate a company's commitment to responsible AI through structured engagements and thorough assessment of specific risk areas. We have publicly released the framework and toolkit in April 2024, which has received significant attention and positive feedback from the investment community. This paper details each component of the framework, demonstrating its applicability in real-world contexts and its potential to guide ethical AI investments.

With the long term accumulation of high quality educational data, artificial intelligence has shown excellent performance in knowledge tracing. However, due to the lack of interpretability and transparency of some algorithms, this approach will result in reduced stakeholder trust and a decreased acceptance of intelligent decisions. Therefore, algorithms need to achieve high accuracy, and users need to understand the internal operating mechanism and provide reliable explanations for decisions. This paper thoroughly analyzes the interpretability of KT algorithms. First, the concepts and common methods of explainable artificial intelligence and knowledge tracing are introduced. Next, explainable knowledge tracing models are classified into two categories: transparent models and black box models. Then, the interpretable methods used are reviewed from three stages: ante hoc interpretable methods, post hoc interpretable methods, and other dimensions. It is worth noting that current evaluation methods for explainable knowledge tracing are lacking. Hence, contrast and deletion experiments are conducted to explain the prediction results of the deep knowledge tracing model on the ASSISTment2009 by using three XAI methods. Moreover, this paper offers some insights into evaluation methods from the perspective of educational stakeholders. This paper provides a detailed and comprehensive review of the research on explainable knowledge tracing, aiming to offer some basis and inspiration for researchers interested in the interpretability of knowledge tracing.

Organizations that develop and deploy artificial intelligence (AI) systems need to take measures to reduce the associated risks. In this paper, we examine how AI companies could design an AI ethics board in a way that reduces risks from AI. We identify five high-level design choices: (1) What responsibilities should the board have? (2) What should its legal structure be? (3) Who should sit on the board? (4) How should it make decisions and should its decisions be binding? (5) What resources does it need? We break down each of these questions into more specific sub-questions, list options, and discuss how different design choices affect the board's ability to reduce risks from AI. Several failures have shown that designing an AI ethics board can be challenging. This paper provides a toolbox that can help AI companies to overcome these challenges.