Post hoc explanation methods such as SHAP and LIME are widely used to interpret text classifiers, but their visualizations are mainly designed for left-to-right languages. When applied to right-to-left (RTL) languages such as Urdu, Arabic, Persian, and Hebrew, the attribution values remain mathematically valid, while their visual presentation fails. Tokens appear out of sequence, connected letterforms break apart, and plot layouts do not follow the natural reading direction. This study addresses this gap as a visualization problem rather than a limitation of the explanation methods themselves. We present SHAP-RTL, a rendering layer that corrects reading direction and script shaping in SHAP and LIME visualizations, with per-language font selection, while preserving the original attribution values, feature ordering, and model outputs. The approach is evaluated on Urdu, Arabic, Hebrew, and Persian hate and offensive-language datasets using TF-IDF and logistic regression classifiers. Rendering correctness is measured by an OCR round trip over 200 feature words per language. Default rendering yields character error rates of 0.820 to 0.979, meaning the label no longer carries its token; the common reshape-and-reorder workaround fails for Urdu at 0.998, worse than no correction; and the Matplotlib 3.11.0 text rewrite inverts that workaround, while SHAP-RTL remains correct under both versions. The framework also verbalizes the same attributions as short contextual explanations in the reader's language, constrained to the identified features. Evaluation in this paper concerns rendering correctness; assessment of the generated explanations is left to future work. The study highlights the importance of language-aware visualization in making post hoc explainability more accessible across different writing systems.
LLMs deployed multilingually are often audited via English explanations for non-English inputs. We evaluate extractive explanations ''where the model identifies input token spans as evidence alongside a generated rationale'' and uncover a systematic trade-off: English-pivot explanations can achieve higher span agreement with human rationales while their evidence becomes less causally grounded in the model's prediction, as measured by both comprehensiveness and sufficiency. Across 3 tasks, 5languages, and 2multilingual LLM families, we find that English explanations frequently produce fluent but loosely anchored rationales, with comprehensiveness degrading by up to 5.7x relative to native-language conditions - even as task accuracy remains stable across settings. For socially nuanced classification, English pivots also fail to preserve pragmatic cues, reducing both faithfulness and span agreement. We recommend auditing explanations in the input language, reporting multi-faceted faithfulness metrics beyond lexical overlap, and treating English rationales as communication summaries rather than faithful decision traces.
Zero-shot textual explanations aim to make image classifiers more transparent by probing their internal representations, without relying on task-specific supervision or LVLMs. However, existing methods often miss the features that truly drive the prediction, resulting in limited \textit{faithfulness} to the evidence underlying the model's decision. To address this, we propose FaithTrace. Motivated by the idea that faithful explanations should describe concepts that strongly influence the prediction, FaithTrace directly measures how much the representation induced by the explanation changes the class logit. We introduce an influence score, computed as the directional derivative of the class logit along the text-induced direction in the classifier's feature space, and use it as a proxy for faithfulness. Moreover, we extend this influence score into quantitative evaluation metrics, helping fill the gap in faithfulness evaluation for textual explanations. Experiments show that FaithTrace yields more faithful explanations than baselines, facilitating a more accurate understanding of the model. The code will be publicly released.
Toshinori Yamauchi, Hiroshi Kera, Kazuhiko Kawamoto
Post-hoc explanation methods are widely used to inspect image classifiers, but their reliability depends on design choices that are often treated as implementation details. We study this issue for LIME on document image classification, focusing on the segmentation step that defines the interpretable units being perturbed. Standard image-based LIME typically relies on natural-image superpixels, which are poorly aligned with document structure such as text regions, layout blocks, and identification codes. Using RVL-CDIP, we compare Quickshift and SLIC with document-aware segmentations based on OCR bounding boxes and regular grids. Our results show that segmentation strongly affects explanation consistency, correctness, and local fidelity. Document-aware segmentations produce more stable and faithful explanations, require fewer perturbations to converge, and expose shortcut behaviour based on document identification codes, a known RVL-CDIP bias that superpixel-based LIME often obscures. These findings show that reliable post-hoc explanation requires domain-aware interpretable representations, and that segmentation should be treated as part of the explanation method rather than as neutral preprocessing.