Towards interpretable AI with quantum annealing feature selection

Post-training quantization (PTQ) has become a practical solution for deploying deep learning models on resource-constrained edge devices by compressing high-precision floating-point weights into low-precision representations without requiring retraining. Past research has demonstrated that quantization largely preserves classification accuracy; however, whether it also preserves the model's internal reasoning remains an open question. This study presents a systematic evaluation on how static PTQ affects the interpretability / explainability of five widely used CNN architectures: VGG19, ResNet18, EfficientNet-B0, DenseNet161, and MobileNetV2 at INT8 and INT4 precision. We employ a dual interpretability framework that combines Grad-CAM for spatial attention analysis with LIME for input-level feature attribution, and systematically compare full-precision and quantized models on two binary classification datasets. Interpretability is evaluated using three complementary metrics: the Pearson correlation coefficient, structural similarity index, and top-20% IoU to capture distributional and structural variations in model explanations, supplemented by deletion/insertion faithfulness analysis. The results show that classification accuracy is not a reliable indicator of interpretability stability under reduced precision. DenseNet161 maintains strong feature consistency across both precision levels, whereas EfficientNet-B0, despite achieving competitive spatial attention and classification accuracy at INT8 precision, exhibits a substantial degradation in input-level feature attribution. These findings have direct implications for the trustworthy deployment of quantized models in applications with high interpretability requirements, demonstrating that architecture selection is as important as the quantization strategy.

Numerous studies have analyzed the use of hybrid quantum-classical convolutional neural networks as a promising alternative to classical deep learning. However, network components on quantum hardware impose fundamental limitations, while the scalability of quantum circuits leads to trainability issues. In this work, we investigate whether small, classically-emulated quantum circuit components can play a meaningful role within complex models, offering an alternative to purely classical convolutional architectures. To this end, we present a systematic study of the effectiveness of a Hybrid Quantum-inspired Convolutional Neural Network (HQiCNN) compared with a parameter-matched classical Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) that differs only in an intermediate dense neural layer. Both models are evaluated on two real-world medical datasets while systematically varying the different hyperparameters, ensuring a fair model comparison that is both dataset and hyperparameter independent. The results show that no architecture consistently dominates the other: the HQiCNN achieves its largest gains in intermediate-data regimes, whereas the CNN reaches the highest accuracies for the largest training sets in both datasets. Furthermore, removing entanglement produces comparable performance while enabling substantially better scalability of quantum simulations, and richer observable sets become beneficial only when sufficient training data are available. Finally, we propose two SHAP-based explainability tools for comparing the predictions between both models, $|SHAP|$IoU and $EMD_{pos}$ metric, to demonstrate that both architectures consistently attend to anatomically plausible regions. Thus, we provide a comprehensive benchmark showing that, under certain conditions, hybrid quantum-inspired models are an alternative that can offer benefits in practical tasks such as medical image classification.

Explainable AI (XAI) techniques are increasingly important for the validation and responsible use of modern deep learning models, but are difficult to evaluate due to the lack of good ground-truth to compare against. We propose a framework that serves as a quantifiable metric for the quality of XAI methods, based on continuous input perturbation. Our metric formally considers the sufficiency and necessity of the attributed information to the model's decision-making, and we illustrate a range of cases where it aligns better with human intuitions of explanation quality than do existing metrics. To exploit the properties of this metric, we also propose a novel XAI method, considering the case where we fine-tune a model using a differentiable approximation of the metric as a supervision signal. The result is an adapter module that can be trained on top of any black-box model to output causal explanations of the model's decision process, without degrading model performance. We show that the explanations generated by this method outperform those of competing XAI techniques according to a number of quantifiable metrics.