Research Papers

The evaluation of explainable artificial intelligence is challenging, because automated and human-centred metrics of explanation quality may diverge. To clarify their relationship, we investigated whether human and artificial image classification will benefit from the same visual explanations. In three experiments, we analysed human reaction times, errors, and subjective ratings while participants classified image segments. These segments either reflected human attention (eye movements, manual selections) or the outputs of two attribution methods explaining a ResNet (Grad-CAM, XRAI). We also had this model classify the same segments. Humans and the model largely agreed on the interpretability of attribution methods: Grad-CAM was easily interpretable for indoor scenes and landscapes, but not for objects, while the reverse pattern was observed for XRAI. Conversely, human and model performance diverged for human-generated segments. Our results caution against general statements about interpretability, as it varies with the explanation method, the explained images, and the agent interpreting them.

The field of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims to explain how black-box machine learning models work. Much of the work centers around the holy grail of providing post-hoc feature attributions to any model architecture. While the pace of innovation around novel methods has slowed down, the question remains of how to choose a method, and how to make it fit for purpose. Recently, efforts around benchmarking XAI methods have suggested metrics for that purpose -- but there are many choices. That bounty of choice still leaves an end user unclear on how to proceed. This paper focuses on comparing metrics with the aim of measuring faithfulness of local explanations on tabular classification problems -- and shows that the current metrics don't agree; leaving users unsure how to choose the most faithful explanations.

May I Ask a Follow-up Question? Understanding the Benefits of Conversations in Neural Network Explainability

Tong Zhang, X. Jessie Yang, Boyang Li

Research in explainable AI (XAI) aims to provide insights into the decision-making process of opaque AI models. To date, most XAI methods offer one-off and static explanations, which cannot cater to the diverse backgrounds and understanding levels of users. With this paper, we investigate if free-form conversations can enhance users' comprehension of static explanations, improve acceptance and trust in the explanation methods, and facilitate human-AI collaboration. Participants are presented with static explanations, followed by a conversation with a human expert regarding the explanations. We measure the effect of the conversation on participants' ability to choose, from three machine learning models, the most accurate one based on explanations and their self-reported comprehension, acceptance, and trust. Empirical results show that conversations significantly improve comprehension, acceptance, trust, and collaboration. Our findings highlight the importance of customized model explanations in the format of free-form conversations and provide insights for the future design of conversational explanations.

Argument Attribution Explanations in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (Technical Report)

Xiang Yin, Nico Potyka, Francesca Toni

Argumentative explainable AI has been advocated by several in recent years, with an increasing interest on explaining the reasoning outcomes of Argumentation Frameworks (AFs). While there is a considerable body of research on qualitatively explaining the reasoning outcomes of AFs with debates/disputes/dialogues in the spirit of extension-based semantics, explaining the quantitative reasoning outcomes of AFs under gradual semantics has not received much attention, despite widespread use in applications. In this paper, we contribute to filling this gap by proposing a novel theory of Argument Attribution Explanations (AAEs) by incorporating the spirit of feature attribution from machine learning in the context of Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs): whereas feature attribution is used to determine the influence of features towards outputs of machine learning models, AAEs are used to determine the influence of arguments towards topic arguments of interest. We study desirable properties of AAEs, including some new ones and some partially adapted from the literature to our setting. To demonstrate the applicability of our AAEs in practice, we conclude by carrying out two case studies in the scenarios of fake news detection and movie recommender systems.

The problem of revealing botnet activity through Domain Generation Algorithm (DGA) detection seems to be solved, considering that available deep learning classifiers achieve accuracies of over 99.9%. However, these classifiers provide a false sense of security as they are heavily biased and allow for trivial detection bypass. In this work, we leverage explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods to analyze the reasoning of deep learning classifiers and to systematically reveal such biases. We show that eliminating these biases from DGA classifiers considerably deteriorates their performance. Nevertheless we are able to design a context-aware detection system that is free of the identified biases and maintains the detection rate of state-of-the art deep learning classifiers. In this context, we propose a visual analysis system that helps to better understand a classifier's reasoning, thereby increasing trust in and transparency of detection methods and facilitating decision-making.

Industrial revolutions have historically disrupted manufacturing by introducing automation into production. Increasing automation reshapes the role of the human worker. Advances in robotics and artificial intelligence open new frontiers of human-machine collaboration. Such collaboration can be realized considering two sub-fields of artificial intelligence: active learning and explainable artificial intelligence. Active learning aims to devise strategies that help obtain data that allows machine learning algorithms to learn better. On the other hand, explainable artificial intelligence aims to make the machine learning models intelligible to the human person. The present work first describes Industry 5.0, human-machine collaboration, and state-of-the-art regarding quality inspection, emphasizing visual inspection. Then it outlines how human-machine collaboration could be realized and enhanced in visual inspection. Finally, some of the results obtained in the EU H2020 STAR project regarding visual inspection are shared, considering artificial intelligence, human digital twins, and cybersecurity.

Visual Analytics of Neuron Vulnerability to Adversarial Attacks on Convolutional Neural Networks

Yiran Li, Junpeng Wang, Takanori Fujiwara +1

Adversarial attacks on a convolutional neural network (CNN) -- injecting human-imperceptible perturbations into an input image -- could fool a high-performance CNN into making incorrect predictions. The success of adversarial attacks raises serious concerns about the robustness of CNNs, and prevents them from being used in safety-critical applications, such as medical diagnosis and autonomous driving. Our work introduces a visual analytics approach to understanding adversarial attacks by answering two questions: (1) which neurons are more vulnerable to attacks and (2) which image features do these vulnerable neurons capture during the prediction? For the first question, we introduce multiple perturbation-based measures to break down the attacking magnitude into individual CNN neurons and rank the neurons by their vulnerability levels. For the second, we identify image features (e.g., cat ears) that highly stimulate a user-selected neuron to augment and validate the neuron's responsibility. Furthermore, we support an interactive exploration of a large number of neurons by aiding with hierarchical clustering based on the neurons' roles in the prediction. To this end, a visual analytics system is designed to incorporate visual reasoning for interpreting adversarial attacks. We validate the effectiveness of our system through multiple case studies as well as feedback from domain experts.

Invisible Users: Uncovering End-Users' Requirements for Explainable AI via Explanation Forms and Goals

Weina Jin, Jianyu Fan, Diane Gromala +2

Non-technical end-users are silent and invisible users of the state-of-the-art explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) technologies. Their demands and requirements for AI explainability are not incorporated into the design and evaluation of XAI techniques, which are developed to explain the rationales of AI decisions to end-users and assist their critical decisions. This makes XAI techniques ineffective or even harmful in high-stakes applications, such as healthcare, criminal justice, finance, and autonomous driving systems. To systematically understand end-users' requirements to support the technical development of XAI, we conducted the EUCA user study with 32 layperson participants in four AI-assisted critical tasks. The study identified comprehensive user requirements for feature-, example-, and rule-based XAI techniques (manifested by the end-user-friendly explanation forms) and XAI evaluation objectives (manifested by the explanation goals), which were shown to be helpful to directly inspire the proposal of new XAI algorithms and evaluation metrics. The EUCA study findings, the identified explanation forms and goals for technical specification, and the EUCA study dataset support the design and evaluation of end-user-centered XAI techniques for accessible, safe, and accountable AI.

Many visualizations have been developed for explainable AI (XAI), but they often require further reasoning by users to interpret. Investigating XAI for high-stakes medical diagnosis, we propose improving domain alignment with diagrammatic and abductive reasoning to reduce the interpretability gap. We developed DiagramNet to predict cardiac diagnoses from heart auscultation, select the best-fitting hypothesis based on criteria evaluation, and explain with clinically-relevant murmur diagrams. The ante-hoc interpretable model leverages domain-relevant ontology, representation, and reasoning process to increase trust in expert users. In modeling studies, we found that DiagramNet not only provides faithful murmur shape explanations, but also has better performance than baseline models. We demonstrate the interpretability and trustworthiness of diagrammatic, abductive explanations in a qualitative user study with medical students, showing that clinically-relevant, diagrammatic explanations are preferred over technical saliency map explanations. This work contributes insights into providing domain-aligned explanations for user-centric XAI in complex domains.

Deep visual models have widespread applications in high-stake domains. Hence, their black-box nature is currently attracting a large interest of the research community. We present the first survey in Explainable AI that focuses on the methods and metrics for interpreting deep visual models. Covering the landmark contributions along the state-of-the-art, we not only provide a taxonomic organization of the existing techniques, but also excavate a range of evaluation metrics and collate them as measures of different properties of model explanations. Along the insightful discussion on the current trends, we also discuss the challenges and future avenues for this research direction.

Interactive Artificial Intelligence (AI) agents are becoming increasingly prevalent in society. However, application of such systems without understanding them can be problematic. Black-box AI systems can lead to liability and accountability issues when they produce an incorrect decision. Explainable AI (XAI) seeks to bridge the knowledge gap, between developers and end-users, by offering insights into how an AI algorithm functions. Many modern algorithms focus on making the AI model "transparent", i.e. unveil the inherent functionality of the agent in a simpler format. However, these approaches do not cater to end-users of these systems, as users may not possess the requisite knowledge to understand these explanations in a reasonable amount of time. Therefore, to be able to develop suitable XAI methods, we need to understand the factors which influence subjective perception and objective usability. In this paper, we present a novel user-study which studies four differing XAI modalities commonly employed in prior work for explaining AI behavior, i.e. Decision Trees, Text, Programs. We study these XAI modalities in the context of explaining the actions of a self-driving car on a highway, as driving is an easily understandable real-world task and self-driving cars is a keen area of interest within the AI community. Our findings highlight internal consistency issues wherein participants perceived language explanations to be significantly more usable, however participants were better able to objectively understand the decision making process of the car through a decision tree explanation. Our work also provides further evidence of importance of integrating user-specific and situational criteria into the design of XAI systems. Our findings show that factors such as computer science experience, and watching the car succeed or fail can impact the perception and usefulness of the explanation.

Machine learning (ML) on graph-structured data has recently received deepened interest in the context of intrusion detection in the cybersecurity domain. Due to the increasing amounts of data generated by monitoring tools as well as more and more sophisticated attacks, these ML methods are gaining traction. Knowledge graphs and their corresponding learning techniques such as Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) with their ability to seamlessly integrate data from multiple domains using human-understandable vocabularies, are finding application in the cybersecurity domain. However, similar to other connectionist models, GNNs are lacking transparency in their decision making. This is especially important as there tend to be a high number of false positive alerts in the cybersecurity domain, such that triage needs to be done by domain experts, requiring a lot of man power. Therefore, we are addressing Explainable AI (XAI) for GNNs to enhance trust management by exploring combining symbolic and sub-symbolic methods in the area of cybersecurity that incorporate domain knowledge. We experimented with this approach by generating explanations in an industrial demonstrator system. The proposed method is shown to produce intuitive explanations for alerts for a diverse range of scenarios. Not only do the explanations provide deeper insights into the alerts, but they also lead to a reduction of false positive alerts by 66% and by 93% when including the fidelity metric.