Research Papers

Facing the escalating threat of global wildfires, numerous computer vision techniques using remote sensing data have been applied in this area. However, the selection of deep learning methods for wildfire prediction remains uncertain due to the lack of comparative analysis in a quantitative and explainable manner, crucial for improving prevention measures and refining models. This study aims to thoroughly compare the performance, efficiency, and explainability of four prevalent deep learning architectures: Autoencoder, ResNet, UNet, and Transformer-based Swin-UNet. Employing a real-world dataset that includes nearly a decade of remote sensing data from California, U.S., these models predict the spread of wildfires for the following day. Through detailed quantitative comparison analysis, we discovered that Transformer-based Swin-UNet and UNet generally outperform Autoencoder and ResNet, particularly due to the advanced attention mechanisms in Transformer-based Swin-UNet and the efficient use of skip connections in both UNet and Transformer-based Swin-UNet, which contribute to superior predictive accuracy and model interpretability. Then we applied XAI techniques on all four models, this not only enhances the clarity and trustworthiness of models but also promotes focused improvements in wildfire prediction capabilities. The XAI analysis reveals that UNet and Transformer-based Swin-UNet are able to focus on critical features such as 'Previous Fire Mask', 'Drought', and 'Vegetation' more effectively than the other two models, while also maintaining balanced attention to the remaining features, leading to their superior performance. The insights from our thorough comparative analysis offer substantial implications for future model design and also provide guidance for model selection in different scenarios.

Explainable AI for Clinical Outcome Prediction: A Survey of Clinician Perceptions and Preferences

Jun Hou, Lucy Lu Wang

Explainable AI (XAI) techniques are necessary to help clinicians make sense of AI predictions and integrate predictions into their decision-making workflow. In this work, we conduct a survey study to understand clinician preference among different XAI techniques when they are used to interpret model predictions over text-based EHR data. We implement four XAI techniques (LIME, Attention-based span highlights, exemplar patient retrieval, and free-text rationales generated by LLMs) on an outcome prediction model that uses ICU admission notes to predict a patient's likelihood of experiencing in-hospital mortality. Using these XAI implementations, we design and conduct a survey study of 32 practicing clinicians, collecting their feedback and preferences on the four techniques. We synthesize our findings into a set of recommendations describing when each of the XAI techniques may be more appropriate, their potential limitations, as well as recommendations for improvement.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques hold significant potential for enhancing the causal discovery process, which is crucial for understanding complex systems in areas like healthcare, economics, and artificial intelligence. However, no causal discovery methods currently incorporate explainability into their models to derive the causal graphs. Thus, in this paper we explore this innovative approach, as it offers substantial potential and represents a promising new direction worth investigating. Specifically, we introduce ReX, a causal discovery method that leverages machine learning (ML) models coupled with explainability techniques, specifically Shapley values, to identify and interpret significant causal relationships among variables. Comparative evaluations on synthetic datasets comprising continuous tabular data reveal that ReX outperforms state-of-the-art causal discovery methods across diverse data generation processes, including non-linear and additive noise models. Moreover, ReX was tested on the Sachs single-cell protein-signaling dataset, achieving a precision of 0.952 and recovering key causal relationships with no incorrect edges. Taking together, these results showcase ReX's effectiveness in accurately recovering true causal structures while minimizing false positive predictions, its robustness across diverse datasets, and its applicability to real-world problems. By combining ML and explainability techniques with causal discovery, ReX bridges the gap between predictive modeling and causal inference, offering an effective tool for understanding complex causal structures.

New research focuses on creating artificial intelligence (AI) solutions for network intrusion detection systems (NIDS), drawing its inspiration from the ever-growing number of intrusions on networked systems, increasing its complexity and intelligibility. Hence, the use of explainable AI (XAI) techniques in real-world intrusion detection systems comes from the requirement to comprehend and elucidate black-box AI models to security analysts. In an effort to meet such requirements, this paper focuses on applying and evaluating White-Box XAI techniques (particularly LRP, IG, and DeepLift) for NIDS via an end-to-end framework for neural network models, using three widely used network intrusion datasets (NSL-KDD, CICIDS-2017, and RoEduNet-SIMARGL2021), assessing its global and local scopes, and examining six distinct assessment measures (descriptive accuracy, sparsity, stability, robustness, efficiency, and completeness). We also compare the performance of white-box XAI methods with black-box XAI methods. The results show that using White-box XAI techniques scores high in robustness and completeness, which are crucial metrics for IDS. Moreover, the source codes for the programs developed for our XAI evaluation framework are available to be improved and used by the research community.

Background: Despite the current ubiquity of Large Language Models (LLMs) across the medical domain, there is a surprising lack of studies which address their reasoning behaviour. We emphasise the importance of understanding reasoning behaviour as opposed to high-level prediction accuracies, since it is equivalent to explainable AI (XAI) in this context. In particular, achieving XAI in medical LLMs used in the clinical domain will have a significant impact across the healthcare sector. Results: Therefore, in this work, we adapt the existing concept of reasoning behaviour and articulate its interpretation within the specific context of medical LLMs. We survey and categorise current state-of-the-art approaches for modeling and evaluating reasoning reasoning in medical LLMs. Additionally, we propose theoretical frameworks which can empower medical professionals or machine learning engineers to gain insight into the low-level reasoning operations of these previously obscure models. We also outline key open challenges facing the development of Large Reasoning Models. Conclusion: The subsequent increased transparency and trust in medical machine learning models by clinicians as well as patients will accelerate the integration, application as well as further development of medical AI for the healthcare system as a whole.

As AI systems become increasingly powerful, the need for safe AI has become more pressing. Humans are an attractive model for AI safety: as the only known agents capable of general intelligence, they perform robustly even under conditions that deviate significantly from prior experiences, explore the world safely, understand pragmatics, and can cooperate to meet their intrinsic goals. Intelligence, when coupled with cooperation and safety mechanisms, can drive sustained progress and well-being. These properties are a function of the architecture of the brain and the learning algorithms it implements. Neuroscience may thus hold important keys to technical AI safety that are currently underexplored and underutilized. In this roadmap, we highlight and critically evaluate several paths toward AI safety inspired by neuroscience: emulating the brain's representations, information processing, and architecture; building robust sensory and motor systems from imitating brain data and bodies; fine-tuning AI systems on brain data; advancing interpretability using neuroscience methods; and scaling up cognitively-inspired architectures. We make several concrete recommendations for how neuroscience can positively impact AI safety.

SafetyAnalyst: Interpretable, Transparent, and Steerable Safety Moderation for AI Behavior

Jing-Jing Li, Valentina Pyatkin, Max Kleiman-Weiner +7

The ideal AI safety moderation system would be both structurally interpretable (so its decisions can be reliably explained) and steerable (to align to safety standards and reflect a community's values), which current systems fall short on. To address this gap, we present SafetyAnalyst, a novel AI safety moderation framework. Given an AI behavior, SafetyAnalyst uses chain-of-thought reasoning to analyze its potential consequences by creating a structured "harm-benefit tree," which enumerates harmful and beneficial actions and effects the AI behavior may lead to, along with likelihood, severity, and immediacy labels that describe potential impacts on stakeholders. SafetyAnalyst then aggregates all effects into a harmfulness score using 28 fully interpretable weight parameters, which can be aligned to particular safety preferences. We applied this framework to develop an open-source LLM prompt safety classification system, distilled from 18.5 million harm-benefit features generated by frontier LLMs on 19k prompts. On comprehensive benchmarks, we show that SafetyAnalyst (average F1=0.81) outperforms existing moderation systems (average F1$<$0.72) on prompt safety classification, while offering the additional advantages of interpretability, transparency, and steerability.

This study is located in the Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HCAI) and focuses on the results of a user-centered assessment of commonly used eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) algorithms, specifically investigating how humans understand and interact with the explanations provided by these algorithms. To achieve this, we employed a multi-disciplinary approach that included state-of-the-art research methods from social sciences to measure the comprehensibility of explanations generated by a state-of-the-art lachine learning model, specifically the Gradient Boosting Classifier (XGBClassifier). We conducted an extensive empirical user study involving interviews with 39 participants from three different groups, each with varying expertise in data science, data visualization, and domain-specific knowledge related to the dataset used for training the machine learning model. Participants were asked a series of questions to assess their understanding of the model's explanations. To ensure replicability, we built the model using a publicly available dataset from the UC Irvine Machine Learning Repository, focusing on edible and non-edible mushrooms. Our findings reveal limitations in existing XAI methods and confirm the need for new design principles and evaluation techniques that address the specific information needs and user perspectives of different classes of AI stakeholders. We believe that the results of our research and the cross-disciplinary methodology we developed can be successfully adapted to various data types and user profiles, thus promoting dialogue and address opportunities in HCAI research. To support this, we are making the data resulting from our study publicly available.

The growing capabilities of AI models are leading to their wider use, including in safety-critical domains. Explainable AI (XAI) aims to make these models safer to use by making their inference process more transparent. However, current explainability methods are seldom evaluated in the way they are intended to be used: by real-world end users. To address this, we conducted a large-scale user study with 85 healthcare practitioners in the context of human-AI collaborative chest X-ray analysis. We evaluated three types of explanations: visual explanations (saliency maps), natural language explanations, and a combination of both modalities. We specifically examined how different explanation types influence users depending on whether the AI advice and explanations are factually correct. We find that text-based explanations lead to significant over-reliance, which is alleviated by combining them with saliency maps. We also observe that the quality of explanations, that is, how much factually correct information they entail, and how much this aligns with AI correctness, significantly impacts the usefulness of the different explanation types.

Thyroid carcinoma, a significant yet often controllable cancer, has seen a rise in cases, largely due to advancements in diagnostic methods. Differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC), which includes papillary and follicular varieties, is typically associated with a positive prognosis in academic circles. Nevertheless, there are still some individuals who may experience a recurrence. This study employs machine learning, particularly deep learning models, to predict the recurrence of DTC, with the goal of improving patient care through personalized treatment approaches. By analysing a dataset containing clinicopathological features of patients, the model achieved remarkable accuracy rates of 98% during training and 96% during testing. To improve the model's interpretability, we used techniques like LIME and Morris Sensitivity Analysis. These methods gave us valuable insights into how the model makes decisions. The results suggest that combining deep learning models with interpretability techniques can be extremely useful in quickly identifying the recurrence of thyroid cancer in patients. This can help in making informed therapeutic choices and customizing treatment approaches for individual patients.

Objective: To improve prediction of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) progression to End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) using machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models applied to an integrated clinical and claims dataset of varying observation windows, supported by explainable AI (XAI) to enhance interpretability and reduce bias. Materials and Methods: We utilized data about 10,326 CKD patients, combining their clinical and claims information from 2009 to 2018. Following data preprocessing, cohort identification, and feature engineering, we evaluated multiple statistical, ML and DL models using data extracted from five distinct observation windows. Feature importance and Shapley value analysis were employed to understand key predictors. Models were tested for robustness, clinical relevance, misclassification errors and bias issues. Results: Integrated data models outperformed those using single data sources, with the Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) model achieving the highest AUC (0.93) and F1 score (0.65). A 24-month observation window was identified as optimal for balancing early detection and prediction accuracy. The 2021 eGFR equation improved prediction accuracy and reduced racial bias, notably for African American patients. Discussion: Improved ESRD prediction accuracy, results interpretability and bias mitigation strategies presented in this study have the potential to significantly enhance CKD and ESRD management, support targeted early interventions and reduce healthcare disparities. Conclusion: This study presents a robust framework for predicting ESRD outcomes in CKD patients, improving clinical decision-making and patient care through multi-sourced, integrated data and AI/ML methods. Future research will expand data integration and explore the application of this framework to other chronic diseases.

Wildfires pose a significant natural disaster risk to populations and contribute to accelerated climate change. As wildfires are also affected by climate change, extreme wildfires are becoming increasingly frequent. Although they occur less frequently globally than those sparked by human activities, lightning-ignited wildfires play a substantial role in carbon emissions and account for the majority of burned areas in certain regions. While existing computational models, especially those based on machine learning, aim to predict lightning-ignited wildfires, they are typically tailored to specific regions with unique characteristics, limiting their global applicability. In this study, we present machine learning models designed to characterize and predict lightning-ignited wildfires on a global scale. Our approach involves classifying lightning-ignited versus anthropogenic wildfires, and estimating with high accuracy the probability of lightning to ignite a fire based on a wide spectrum of factors such as meteorological conditions and vegetation. Utilizing these models, we analyze seasonal and spatial trends in lightning-ignited wildfires shedding light on the impact of climate change on this phenomenon. We analyze the influence of various features on the models using eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) frameworks. Our findings highlight significant global differences between anthropogenic and lightning-ignited wildfires. Moreover, we demonstrate that, even over a short time span of less than a decade, climate changes have steadily increased the global risk of lightning-ignited wildfires. This distinction underscores the imperative need for dedicated predictive models and fire weather indices tailored specifically to each type of wildfire.