The shipping industry has a significant impact on the global economy, emphasizing the need for operational availability and safety through the use of effective maintenance techniques. During the last decades, predictive maintenance (PdM) has emerged as a promising solution compared to the existing conventional maintenance systems. This is because it offers several advantageous functions, such as damage predictions for vessel components, reduced downtime, improved and extended life of machinery, as well as higher safety during voyages. However, existing methodologies developed for performing PdM do not provide explanations of their results to users, so that they can understand the failures that may occur. To address this limitation, this paper proposes a novel framework based on a fuzzy decision tree and a deep residual neural network, aiming to perform explainable PdM on naval vessels. The proposed framework is able to generate fuzzy local rules based on the dataset used, and can provide explanations of its outcomes, using cause-and-effect relationships, in a way that are understandable to users, thereby gaining their trust. Experiments using a publicly available dataset demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework, as it achieves an accuracy of 99.24%.
Predicting when maritime systems require maintenance can be critical, avoiding hazards and costly consequences. To address this problem, this paper proposes an explainable decision-making framework that integrates a neuro-fuzzy prediction model with a two-stage explainable component. The first stage of this component produces feature-attribution explanations, using gradient-based saliency maps, and the second stage extracts local rules using a fuzzy decision tree. The proposed framework is generic and can be integrated into any deep learning-based approach, rendering it explainable. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first fuzzy logic-based framework enabling both feature-level and local rule-based explanations of black box models. This approach aims to foster trustworthiness in decision making through user-understandable machine inferences. The performance of the proposed framework using a deep residual-based neural backbone is evaluated on various general-purpose public benchmark datasets, and its utility in maritime is demonstrated in the context of early fault detection in a naval propulsion system dataset. The results indicate that it can provide predictions outperforming relevant state-of-the-art approaches, with an average AUC-ROC (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve) value, reaching up to 99%, while offering the advantage of explainability.
Dionisis Kalogeropoulos, Georgia Sovatzidi, Dimitris K. Iakovidis
Predictive maintenance relies on accurate Remaining Useful Life estimation, often formulated using survival analysis over multivariate time-series data. While modern deep survival models achieve strong predictive performance, their black-box nature limits their use in safety-critical settings where actionable insight is required. In this work, we introduce \textit{SurvCF(t)}, the first framework for generating counterfactual explanations for survival models operating on time-series data. \textit{SurvCF(t)} identifies minimal, plausible, and temporally consistent changes to an asset's operational history that increase its predicted life time, framing explanation as a constrained optimization problem combining validity, proximity, sparsity, and plausibility. We evaluate the method on multiple benchmarks, including C-MAPSS, N-CMAPSS, and a real-world case study of the Scania Component_X dataset, demonstrating its ability to produce actionable and interpretable interventions. Our results show that \textit{SurvCF(t)} bridges the gap between survival prediction and prescriptive maintenance, enabling explainable and decision-oriented AI for maintenance strategies.
Zara Karazian, Panagiotis Papapetrou, Sindri Magnússon +2
Predictive models are increasingly embedded in operational decision-making, yet standard explanation methods typically explain forecasts rather than the decisions those forecasts induce. This distinction is important in predict-then-optimize systems: large forecast changes may leave the optimizer's action unchanged, while small changes can alter the selected decision and its realized value. We propose Decision Value Attribution (DVA), a Shapley-based framework for attributing the value of a fixed prediction--optimization pipeline. The framework defines cooperative games whose payoff is the downstream decision value, allowing the players to be information sources, optimization or design parameters, or both. We present three variants: InfoDVA attributes value to features, DesignDVA attributes value to operational configurations, and Decision-Value Interactions (DVI) quantifies how information and design jointly create value. We further distinguish post-DVA, which evaluates decisions using realized outcomes, from pre-DVA, which evaluates decisions under the model's full prediction. This separation turns attribution into a decision-level diagnostic of whether the model's operational beliefs align with realized performance. The resulting attributions are expressed in the units of the operational objective and decompose the gain or loss relative to a baseline. Case studies in electricity storage arbitrage and emergency medical service coverage show that predictive explanations can be poor proxies for operational value, that DVA can guide targeted information-control interventions, and that optimization configurations determine when predictive information is decision-relevant.
Konstantinos Ziliaskopoulos, Alexander Vinel, Alice E. Smith