Research Papers

Lack of adequate training samples and noisy high-dimensional features are key challenges faced by Motor Imagery (MI) decoding algorithms for electroencephalogram (EEG) based Brain-Computer Interface (BCI). To address these challenges, inspired from neuro-physiological signatures of MI, this paper proposes a novel Filter-Bank Convolutional Network (FBCNet) for MI classification. FBCNet employs a multi-view data representation followed by spatial filtering to extract spectro-spatially discriminative features. This multistage approach enables efficient training of the network even when limited training data is available. More significantly, in FBCNet, we propose a novel Variance layer that effectively aggregates the EEG time-domain information. With this design, we compare FBCNet with state-of-the-art (SOTA) BCI algorithm on four MI datasets: The BCI competition IV dataset 2a (BCIC-IV-2a), the OpenBMI dataset, and two large datasets from chronic stroke patients. The results show that, by achieving 76.20% 4-class classification accuracy, FBCNet sets a new SOTA for BCIC-IV-2a dataset. On the other three datasets, FBCNet yields up to 8% higher binary classification accuracies. Additionally, using explainable AI techniques we present one of the first reports about the differences in discriminative EEG features between healthy subjects and stroke patients. Also, the FBCNet source code is available at https://github.com/ravikiran-mane/FBCNet.

There has been a growing interest in model-agnostic methods that can make deep learning models more transparent and explainable to a user. Some researchers recently argued that for a machine to achieve a certain degree of human-level explainability, this machine needs to provide human causally understandable explanations, also known as causability. A specific class of algorithms that have the potential to provide causability are counterfactuals. This paper presents an in-depth systematic review of the diverse existing body of literature on counterfactuals and causability for explainable artificial intelligence. We performed an LDA topic modelling analysis under a PRISMA framework to find the most relevant literature articles. This analysis resulted in a novel taxonomy that considers the grounding theories of the surveyed algorithms, together with their underlying properties and applications in real-world data. This research suggests that current model-agnostic counterfactual algorithms for explainable AI are not grounded on a causal theoretical formalism and, consequently, cannot promote causability to a human decision-maker. Our findings suggest that the explanations derived from major algorithms in the literature provide spurious correlations rather than cause/effects relationships, leading to sub-optimal, erroneous or even biased explanations. This paper also advances the literature with new directions and challenges on promoting causability in model-agnostic approaches for explainable artificial intelligence.

The field of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) aims to bring transparency to today's powerful but opaque deep learning models. While local XAI methods explain individual predictions in form of attribution maps, thereby identifying where important features occur (but not providing information about what they represent), global explanation techniques visualize what concepts a model has generally learned to encode. Both types of methods thus only provide partial insights and leave the burden of interpreting the model's reasoning to the user. In this work we introduce the Concept Relevance Propagation (CRP) approach, which combines the local and global perspectives and thus allows answering both the "where" and "what" questions for individual predictions. We demonstrate the capability of our method in various settings, showcasing that CRP leads to more human interpretable explanations and provides deep insights into the model's representation and reasoning through concept atlases, concept composition analyses, and quantitative investigations of concept subspaces and their role in fine-grained decision making.

A trojan backdoor is a hidden pattern typically implanted in a deep neural network. It could be activated and thus forces that infected model behaving abnormally only when an input data sample with a particular trigger present is fed to that model. As such, given a deep neural network model and clean input samples, it is very challenging to inspect and determine the existence of a trojan backdoor. Recently, researchers design and develop several pioneering solutions to address this acute problem. They demonstrate the proposed techniques have a great potential in trojan detection. However, we show that none of these existing techniques completely address the problem. On the one hand, they mostly work under an unrealistic assumption (e.g. assuming availability of the contaminated training database). On the other hand, the proposed techniques cannot accurately detect the existence of trojan backdoors, nor restore high-fidelity trojan backdoor images, especially when the triggers pertaining to the trojan vary in size, shape and position. In this work, we propose TABOR, a new trojan detection technique. Conceptually, it formalizes a trojan detection task as a non-convex optimization problem, and the detection of a trojan backdoor as the task of resolving the optimization through an objective function. Different from the existing technique also modeling trojan detection as an optimization problem, TABOR designs a new objective function--under the guidance of explainable AI techniques as well as heuristics--that could guide optimization to identify a trojan backdoor in a more effective fashion. In addition, TABOR defines a new metric to measure the quality of a trojan backdoor identified. Using an anomaly detection method, we show the new metric could better facilitate TABOR to identify intentionally injected triggers in an infected model and filter out false alarms......

Explainability of deep vision-based autonomous driving systems: Review and challenges

Éloi Zablocki, Hédi Ben-Younes, Patrick Pérez +1

This survey reviews explainability methods for vision-based self-driving systems trained with behavior cloning. The concept of explainability has several facets and the need for explainability is strong in driving, a safety-critical application. Gathering contributions from several research fields, namely computer vision, deep learning, autonomous driving, explainable AI (X-AI), this survey tackles several points. First, it discusses definitions, context, and motivation for gaining more interpretability and explainability from self-driving systems, as well as the challenges that are specific to this application. Second, methods providing explanations to a black-box self-driving system in a post-hoc fashion are comprehensively organized and detailed. Third, approaches from the literature that aim at building more interpretable self-driving systems by design are presented and discussed in detail. Finally, remaining open-challenges and potential future research directions are identified and examined.

Explaining AI systems is fundamental both to the development of high performing models and to the trust placed in them by their users. The Shapley framework for explainability has strength in its general applicability combined with its precise, rigorous foundation: it provides a common, model-agnostic language for AI explainability and uniquely satisfies a set of intuitive mathematical axioms. However, Shapley values are too restrictive in one significant regard: they ignore all causal structure in the data. We introduce a less restrictive framework, Asymmetric Shapley values (ASVs), which are rigorously founded on a set of axioms, applicable to any AI system, and flexible enough to incorporate any causal structure known to be respected by the data. We demonstrate that ASVs can (i) improve model explanations by incorporating causal information, (ii) provide an unambiguous test for unfair discrimination in model predictions, (iii) enable sequentially incremental explanations in time-series models, and (iv) support feature-selection studies without the need for model retraining.

Explanation Methods in Deep Learning: Users, Values, Concerns and Challenges

Gabrielle Ras, Marcel van Gerven, Pim Haselager

Issues regarding explainable AI involve four components: users, laws & regulations, explanations and algorithms. Together these components provide a context in which explanation methods can be evaluated regarding their adequacy. The goal of this chapter is to bridge the gap between expert users and lay users. Different kinds of users are identified and their concerns revealed, relevant statements from the General Data Protection Regulation are analyzed in the context of Deep Neural Networks (DNNs), a taxonomy for the classification of existing explanation methods is introduced, and finally, the various classes of explanation methods are analyzed to verify if user concerns are justified. Overall, it is clear that (visual) explanations can be given about various aspects of the influence of the input on the output. However, it is noted that explanation methods or interfaces for lay users are missing and we speculate which criteria these methods / interfaces should satisfy. Finally it is noted that two important concerns are difficult to address with explanation methods: the concern about bias in datasets that leads to biased DNNs, as well as the suspicion about unfair outcomes.

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) offer great machine learning performance over a range of applications, but their operation is hard to interpret, even for experts. Various explanation algorithms have been proposed to address this issue, yet limited research effort has been reported concerning their user evaluation. In this paper, we report on an online between-group user study designed to evaluate the performance of "saliency maps" - a popular explanation algorithm for image classification applications of CNNs. Our results indicate that saliency maps produced by the LRP algorithm helped participants to learn about some specific image features the system is sensitive to. However, the maps seem to provide very limited help for participants to anticipate the network's output for new images. Drawing on our findings, we highlight implications for design and further research on explainable AI. In particular, we argue the HCI and AI communities should look beyond instance-level explanations.

Grounding Visual Explanations

Lisa Anne Hendricks, Ronghang Hu, Trevor Darrell +1

Existing visual explanation generating agents learn to fluently justify a class prediction. However, they may mention visual attributes which reflect a strong class prior, although the evidence may not actually be in the image. This is particularly concerning as ultimately such agents fail in building trust with human users. To overcome this limitation, we propose a phrase-critic model to refine generated candidate explanations augmented with flipped phrases which we use as negative examples while training. At inference time, our phrase-critic model takes an image and a candidate explanation as input and outputs a score indicating how well the candidate explanation is grounded in the image. Our explainable AI agent is capable of providing counter arguments for an alternative prediction, i.e. counterfactuals, along with explanations that justify the correct classification decisions. Our model improves the textual explanation quality of fine-grained classification decisions on the CUB dataset by mentioning phrases that are grounded in the image. Moreover, on the FOIL tasks, our agent detects when there is a mistake in the sentence, grounds the incorrect phrase and corrects it significantly better than other models.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence: A Survey of Needs, Techniques, Applications, and Future Direction

Melkamu Mersha, Khang Lam, Joseph Wood +2

Artificial intelligence models encounter significant challenges due to their black-box nature, particularly in safety-critical domains such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous vehicles. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) addresses these challenges by providing explanations for how these models make decisions and predictions, ensuring transparency, accountability, and fairness. Existing studies have examined the fundamental concepts of XAI, its general principles, and the scope of XAI techniques. However, there remains a gap in the literature as there are no comprehensive reviews that delve into the detailed mathematical representations, design methodologies of XAI models, and other associated aspects. This paper provides a comprehensive literature review encompassing common terminologies and definitions, the need for XAI, beneficiaries of XAI, a taxonomy of XAI methods, and the application of XAI methods in different application areas. The survey is aimed at XAI researchers, XAI practitioners, AI model developers, and XAI beneficiaries who are interested in enhancing the trustworthiness, transparency, accountability, and fairness of their AI models.

Investigating Explainability of Generative AI for Code through Scenario-based Design

Jiao Sun, Q. Vera Liao, Michael Muller +4

What does it mean for a generative AI model to be explainable? The emergent discipline of explainable AI (XAI) has made great strides in helping people understand discriminative models. Less attention has been paid to generative models that produce artifacts, rather than decisions, as output. Meanwhile, generative AI (GenAI) technologies are maturing and being applied to application domains such as software engineering. Using scenario-based design and question-driven XAI design approaches, we explore users' explainability needs for GenAI in three software engineering use cases: natural language to code, code translation, and code auto-completion. We conducted 9 workshops with 43 software engineers in which real examples from state-of-the-art generative AI models were used to elicit users' explainability needs. Drawing from prior work, we also propose 4 types of XAI features for GenAI for code and gathered additional design ideas from participants. Our work explores explainability needs for GenAI for code and demonstrates how human-centered approaches can drive the technical development of XAI in novel domains.

The Pragmatic Turn in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Andrés Páez

In this paper I argue that the search for explainable models and interpretable decisions in AI must be reformulated in terms of the broader project of offering a pragmatic and naturalistic account of understanding in AI. Intuitively, the purpose of providing an explanation of a model or a decision is to make it understandable to its stakeholders. But without a previous grasp of what it means to say that an agent understands a model or a decision, the explanatory strategies will lack a well-defined goal. Aside from providing a clearer objective for XAI, focusing on understanding also allows us to relax the factivity condition on explanation, which is impossible to fulfill in many machine learning models, and to focus instead on the pragmatic conditions that determine the best fit between a model and the methods and devices deployed to understand it. After an examination of the different types of understanding discussed in the philosophical and psychological literature, I conclude that interpretative or approximation models not only provide the best way to achieve the objectual understanding of a machine learning model, but are also a necessary condition to achieve post-hoc interpretability. This conclusion is partly based on the shortcomings of the purely functionalist approach to post-hoc interpretability that seems to be predominant in most recent literature.