T-MoXAI: A Hierarchical Explainability Framework for Temporal Multimodal Data

While many explainable AI (XAI) methods have been proposed, most are not designed for time-series forecasting models and often rely on the implicit assumption that timestamp features are independent. This assumption ignores the fundamental property of temporal dependence and can lead to explanations that violate the sequential and causal structure of the data. We introduce \textsc{KARMA}, a method for explaining time-series predictors by constructing a Markov surrogate model that captures the temporal dependencies learned by the predictor. Our approach revolves around three main aspects: identifying the minimal history length $K$ that is predictively sufficient for the model, estimating the best-fitting $K$-order Markov transition kernel from the discretized history space, and a five-level global explanation hierarchy that can be derived from the Markov transition kernel, which we illustrate using real-world weather data (Beijing PM 2.5). We also certify using complex synthetic data with known true causal edges that KARMA (i) recovers the data causal structure as learned by the model via a controlled experiment and (ii) identifies temporal dependencies better than established attribution methods such as TimeSHAP.

Multimodal Transformers often produce predictions without clarifying how different modalities jointly support a decision. Most existing multimodal explainable AI (MXAI) methods extend unimodal saliency to multimodal backbones, highlighting important tokens or patches within each modality, but they rarely pinpoint which cross-modal feature pairs provide complementary evidence (synergy) or serve as reliable backups (redundancy). We present Feature-level I2MoE (FL-I2MoE), a structured Mixture-of-Experts layer that operates directly on token/patch sequences from frozen pretrained encoders and explicitly separates unique, synergistic, and redundant evidence at the feature level. We further develop an expert-wise explanation pipeline that combines attribution with top-K% masking to assess faithfulness, and we introduce Monte Carlo interaction probes to quantify pairwise behavior: the Shapley Interaction Index (SII) to score synergistic pairs and a redundancy-gap score to capture substitutable (redundant) pairs. Across three benchmarks (MMIMDb, ENRICO, and MMHS150K), FL-I2MoE yields more interactionspecific and concentrated importance patterns than a dense Transformer with the same encoders. Finally, pair-level masking shows that removing pairs ranked by SII or redundancy-gap degrades performance more than masking randomly chosen pairs under the same budget, supporting that the identified interactions are causally relevant. Code is available at https://github.com/dut0817/FL-I2MoE.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) increasingly support high-stakes decision making by combining complementary information from images and text. While existing explainability methods identify influential image regions or text tokens, they cannot answer a fundamental question: which modality drives a prediction? Consequently, a model may produce the correct output while relying on the wrong source of evidence, masking shortcut learning and unsafe reasoning. We formulate modality attribution as a complementary explainability objective for multimodal foundation models and propose Counterfactual Modality Attribution (CMA), the first framework for quantifying modality-level contributions in MLLMs. CMA generates image-only, text-only, and joint multimodal counterfactuals using coupled diffusion priors and converts them into principled modality attribution scores through a cooperative game-theoretic formulation based on Shapley values. We evaluate CMA on controlled synthetic benchmarks with known ground-truth modality reliance and on a real-world multimodal clinical dataset. CMA correctly identifies the decision-driving modality in 98% of controlled cases and consistently outperforms baselines, revealing failures of cross-modal reasoning that remain invisible to predictive accuracy alone. Our results establish modality attribution as a complementary dimension of explainability beyond feature attribution, providing a principled framework for auditing multimodal foundation models in safety-critical applications.