Research Papers

In this study, we propose the early adoption of Explainable AI (XAI) with a focus on three properties: Quality of explanation, the explanation summaries should be consistent across multiple XAI methods; Architectural Compatibility, for effective integration in XAI, the architecture styles of both the XAI methods and the models to be explained must be compatible with the framework; Configurable operations, XAI explanations are operable, akin to machine learning operations. Thus, an explanation for AI models should be reproducible and tractable to be trustworthy. We present XAIport, a framework of XAI microservices encapsulated into Open APIs to deliver early explanations as observation for learning model quality assurance. XAIport enables configurable XAI operations along with machine learning development. We quantify the operational costs of incorporating XAI with three cloud computer vision services on Microsoft Azure Cognitive Services, Google Cloud Vertex AI, and Amazon Rekognition. Our findings show comparable operational costs between XAI and traditional machine learning, with XAIport significantly improving both cloud AI model performance and explanation stability.

To harness the power of large language models in safety-critical domains, we need to ensure the explainability of their predictions. However, despite the significant attention to model interpretability, there remains an unexplored domain in explaining sequence-to-sequence tasks using methods tailored for textual data. This paper introduces SyntaxShap, a local, model-agnostic explainability method for text generation that takes into consideration the syntax in the text data. The presented work extends Shapley values to account for parsing-based syntactic dependencies. Taking a game theoric approach, SyntaxShap only considers coalitions constraint by the dependency tree. We adopt a model-based evaluation to compare SyntaxShap and its weighted form to state-of-the-art explainability methods adapted to text generation tasks, using diverse metrics including faithfulness, coherency, and semantic alignment of the explanations to the model. We show that our syntax-aware method produces explanations that help build more faithful and coherent explanations for predictions by autoregressive models. Confronted with the misalignment of human and AI model reasoning, this paper also highlights the need for cautious evaluation strategies in explainable AI.

With the rise of complex cyber devices Cyber Forensics (CF) is facing many new challenges. For example, there are dozens of systems running on smartphones, each with more than millions of downloadable applications. Sifting through this large amount of data and making sense requires new techniques, such as from the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI). To apply these techniques successfully in CF, we need to justify and explain the results to the stakeholders of CF, such as forensic analysts and members of the court, for them to make an informed decision. If we want to apply AI successfully in CF, there is a need to develop trust in AI systems. Some other factors in accepting the use of AI in CF are to make AI authentic, interpretable, understandable, and interactive. This way, AI systems will be more acceptable to the public and ensure alignment with legal standards. An explainable AI (XAI) system can play this role in CF, and we call such a system XAI-CF. XAI-CF is indispensable and is still in its infancy. In this paper, we explore and make a case for the significance and advantages of XAI-CF. We strongly emphasize the need to build a successful and practical XAI-CF system and discuss some of the main requirements and prerequisites of such a system. We present a formal definition of the terms CF and XAI-CF and a comprehensive literature review of previous works that apply and utilize XAI to build and increase trust in CF. We discuss some challenges facing XAI-CF. We also provide some concrete solutions to these challenges. We identify key insights and future research directions for building XAI applications for CF. This paper is an effort to explore and familiarize the readers with the role of XAI applications in CF, and we believe that our work provides a promising basis for future researchers interested in XAI-CF.

Machine learning methods have been remarkably successful in material science, providing novel scientific insights, guiding future laboratory experiments, and accelerating materials discovery. Despite the promising performance of these models, understanding the decisions they make is also essential to ensure the scientific value of their outcomes. However, there is a recent and ongoing debate about the diversity of explanations, which potentially leads to scientific inconsistency. This Perspective explores the sources and implications of these diverse explanations in ML applications for physical sciences. Through three case studies in materials science and molecular property prediction, we examine how different models, explanation methods, levels of feature attribution, and stakeholder needs can result in varying interpretations of ML outputs. Our analysis underscores the importance of considering multiple perspectives when interpreting ML models in scientific contexts and highlights the critical need for scientists to maintain control over the interpretation process, balancing data-driven insights with domain expertise to meet specific scientific needs. By fostering a comprehensive understanding of these inconsistencies, we aim to contribute to the responsible integration of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) into physical sciences and improve the trustworthiness of ML applications in scientific discovery.

Explaining Predictive Uncertainty by Exposing Second-Order Effects

Florian Bley, Sebastian Lapuschkin, Wojciech Samek +1

Explainable AI has brought transparency into complex ML blackboxes, enabling, in particular, to identify which features these models use for their predictions. So far, the question of explaining predictive uncertainty, i.e. why a model 'doubts', has been scarcely studied. Our investigation reveals that predictive uncertainty is dominated by second-order effects, involving single features or product interactions between them. We contribute a new method for explaining predictive uncertainty based on these second-order effects. Computationally, our method reduces to a simple covariance computation over a collection of first-order explanations. Our method is generally applicable, allowing for turning common attribution techniques (LRP, Gradient x Input, etc.) into powerful second-order uncertainty explainers, which we call CovLRP, CovGI, etc. The accuracy of the explanations our method produces is demonstrated through systematic quantitative evaluations, and the overall usefulness of our method is demonstrated via two practical showcases.

With Artificial Intelligence (AI) becoming ubiquitous in every application domain, the need for explanations is paramount to enhance transparency and trust among non-technical users. Despite the potential shown by Explainable AI (XAI) for enhancing understanding of complex AI systems, most XAI methods are designed for technical AI experts rather than non-technical consumers. Consequently, such explanations are overwhelmingly complex and seldom guide users in achieving their desired predicted outcomes. This paper presents ongoing research for crafting XAI systems tailored to guide users in achieving desired outcomes through improved human-AI interactions. This paper highlights the research objectives and methods, key takeaways and implications learned from user studies. It outlines open questions and challenges for enhanced human-AI collaboration, which the author aims to address in future work.

A current concern in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is to ensure the trustworthiness of AI systems. The development of explainability methods is one prominent way to address this, which has often resulted in the assumption that the use of explainability will lead to an increase in the trust of users and wider society. However, the dynamics between explainability and trust are not well established and empirical investigations of their relation remain mixed or inconclusive. In this paper we provide a detailed description of the concepts of user trust and distrust in AI and their relation to appropriate reliance. For that we draw from the fields of machine learning, human-computer interaction, and the social sciences. Furthermore, we have created a survey of existing empirical studies that investigate the effects of AI systems and XAI methods on user (dis)trust. With clarifying the concepts and summarizing the empirical investigations, we aim to provide researchers, who examine user trust in AI, with an improved starting point for developing user studies to measure and evaluate the user's attitude towards and reliance on AI systems.

Saliency-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Visual Explanations

Yifei Zhang, James Song, Siyi Gu +4

Explainable AI (XAI) has gained significant attention for providing insights into the decision-making processes of deep learning models, particularly for image classification tasks through visual explanations visualized by saliency maps. Despite their success, challenges remain due to the lack of annotated datasets and standardized evaluation pipelines. In this paper, we introduce Saliency-Bench, a novel benchmark suite designed to evaluate visual explanations generated by saliency methods across multiple datasets. We curated, constructed, and annotated eight datasets, each covering diverse tasks such as scene classification, cancer diagnosis, object classification, and action classification, with corresponding ground-truth explanations. The benchmark includes a standardized and unified evaluation pipeline for assessing faithfulness and alignment of the visual explanation, providing a holistic visual explanation performance assessment. We benchmark these eight datasets with widely used saliency methods on different image classifier architectures to evaluate explanation quality. Additionally, we developed an easy-to-use API for automating the evaluation pipeline, from data accessing, and data loading, to result evaluation. The benchmark is available via our website: https://xaidataset.github.io.

An Information Bottleneck Characterization of the Understanding-Workload Tradeoff

Lindsay Sanneman, Mycal Tucker, Julie Shah

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have underscored the need for explainable AI (XAI) to support human understanding of AI systems. Consideration of human factors that impact explanation efficacy, such as mental workload and human understanding, is central to effective XAI design. Existing work in XAI has demonstrated a tradeoff between understanding and workload induced by different types of explanations. Explaining complex concepts through abstractions (hand-crafted groupings of related problem features) has been shown to effectively address and balance this workload-understanding tradeoff. In this work, we characterize the workload-understanding balance via the Information Bottleneck method: an information-theoretic approach which automatically generates abstractions that maximize informativeness and minimize complexity. In particular, we establish empirical connections between workload and complexity and between understanding and informativeness through human-subject experiments. This empirical link between human factors and information-theoretic concepts provides an important mathematical characterization of the workload-understanding tradeoff which enables user-tailored XAI design.

The machine learning modeling process conventionally culminates in selecting a single model that maximizes a selected performance metric. However, this approach leads to abandoning a more profound analysis of slightly inferior models. Particularly in medical and healthcare studies, where the objective extends beyond predictions to valuable insight generation, relying solely on a single model can result in misleading or incomplete conclusions. This problem is particularly pertinent when dealing with a set of models known as $\textit{Rashomon set}$, with performance close to maximum one. Such a set can be numerous and may contain models describing the data in a different way, which calls for comprehensive analysis. This paper introduces a novel process to explore models in the Rashomon set, extending the conventional modeling approach. We propose the $\texttt{Rashomon_DETECT}$ algorithm to detect models with different behavior. It is based on recent developments in the eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) field. To quantify differences in variable effects among models, we introduce the Profile Disparity Index (PDI) based on measures from functional data analysis. To illustrate the effectiveness of our approach, we showcase its application in predicting survival among hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) patients - a foundational case study. Additionally, we benchmark our approach on other medical data sets, demonstrating its versatility and utility in various contexts. If differently behaving models are detected in the Rashomon set, their combined analysis leads to more trustworthy conclusions, which is of vital importance for high-stakes applications such as medical applications.

Existing artificial intelligence (AI) models for diagnosing knee osteoarthritis (OA) have faced criticism for their lack of transparency and interpretability, despite achieving medical-expert-like performance. This opacity makes them challenging to trust in clinical practice. Recently, explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) has emerged as a specialized technique that can provide confidence in the model's prediction by revealing how the prediction is derived, thus promoting the use of AI systems in healthcare. This paper presents the first survey of XAI techniques used for knee OA diagnosis. The XAI techniques are discussed from two perspectives: data interpretability and model interpretability. The aim of this paper is to provide valuable insights into XAI's potential towards a more reliable knee OA diagnosis approach and encourage its adoption in clinical practice.

While artificial intelligence (AI) has made many successful applications in various domains, its adoption in healthcare lags a little bit behind other high-stakes settings. Several factors contribute to this slower uptake, including regulatory frameworks, patient privacy concerns, and data heterogeneity. However, one significant challenge that impedes the implementation of AI in healthcare, particularly in orthopedics, is the lack of explainability and interpretability around AI models. Addressing the challenge of explainable AI (XAI) in orthopedics requires developing AI models and algorithms that prioritize transparency and interpretability, allowing clinicians, surgeons, and patients to understand the contributing factors behind any AI-powered predictive or descriptive models. The current contribution outlines several key challenges and opportunities that manifest in XAI in orthopedic practice. This work emphasizes the need for interdisciplinary collaborations between AI practitioners, orthopedic specialists, and regulatory entities to establish standards and guidelines for the adoption of XAI in orthopedics.