Explainability

Adversarial attacks on cybersecurity classifiers pose a dual threat: degrading predictions and destabilising the SHAP-based explanations that security analysts rely on to understand and triage alerts. We extend our prior MLP conference study to Random Forest and XGBoost across four tabular security datasets (phishing URLs, UNSW-NB15, NF-ToN-IoT, HIKARI-2021), evaluating five attacks including three black-box methods applicable to non-differentiable tree models. We introduce the Explainability Stability Index (ESI), a scalar metric computed from TreeSHAP attribution drift under adversarial perturbation, reported on the same [0,1] scale as the Robustness Index (RI). A key finding is that gradient-based black-box attacks (ZOO) produce degenerate results against XGBoost (apparent RI ~0.98) due to piecewise-constant prediction surfaces, while score-based Square Attack reveals genuine vulnerability (RI ~0.36). These degenerate perturbations still drive substantial attribution drift: XGBoost ESI ~0.06-0.16 despite near-perfect ZOO robustness, versus 0.14-0.29 for RF, showing that prediction robustness and explanation stability are distinct axes requiring joint measurement. A two-axis framework (gradient dependence, query efficiency) explains the observed attack ranking and yields practical guidance for tree ensemble evaluation. A step-size ablation explains a counterintuitive PGD anomaly on z-score normalised tabular data.

In recent years, large language models have achieved remarkable success and have seen growing adoption in financial applications. At the same time, explainability remains critical in finance, a domain characterized by high stakes and strict regulatory requirements. Although numerous methods have been proposed to explain black box machine learning models, the majority of these approaches are designed for general purpose tasks and do not incorporate domain specific knowledge. In this work, we study the explainability of financial textual data modeled by large language models through the lens of the Shapley value. Specifically, we investigate whether Shapley based attributions align with established financial domain knowledge. Through rigorous theoretical analysis and extensive empirical evaluations, we demonstrate that Shapley values can yield explanations that are consistent with financial reasoning and can offer meaningful insights into the model's behavior in text based financial applications.

Concept-based Explainable AI (C-XAI) seeks human-understandable explanations grounded in semantic concepts, yet validation is limited by the scarcity of fine-grained concept annotations. We evaluate whether mid-scale Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) can perform localized concept naming under strict zero-shot conditions by assigning labels to bounding-box regions at both object and part levels. We propose a reproducible zero-shot evaluation protocol for Concept Naming (CoNa) with (i) closed-set, category-constrained prompting for moderate vocabularies and (ii) Open-CoNa, an embedding-similarity-based strategy for large label spaces. Experiments with four MLLMs (7B-32B) show consistent performance trends across datasets, reaching 62%-88% object-level exact-match accuracy, highlighting the potential of training-free concept annotation from localized regions. We discuss limitations and failure modes and release a reproducible framework to support future low-cost C-XAI research.

Speech-based cognitive impairment detection offers a noninvasive, accessible alternative to costly biomarker assays, yet transformer-based models remain clinically uninterpretable. We propose a multi-stage explainability framework that translates black-box transformer predictions into clinically grounded narratives by integrating SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP)-based token attribution, theory-informed linguistic features, and a four-stage LLM reasoning pipeline using LLaMA-3.1-70B-Instruct. Built on the SpeechCARE-Adaptive Gating Network multimodal screening model (F1 = 72.11% on the NIA PREPARE benchmark), the framework maps model outputs to four cognitive-linguistic dimensions, including lexical richness, syntactic complexity, and semantic coherence. Physician evaluation on 70 stratified English samples demonstrated strong alignment with patient-level cognitive profiles, and a System Usability Scale score of 82/100 indicated high potential for clinical workflow integration.

We review the concepts of interpretability and explainability as they apply to machine learning in physics. We define interpretability as concerning the structural transparency of a model (the ability to understand or approximate its inner workings) and explainability as concerning the scientific content of a model (the ability to map it onto domain knowledge). We discuss the trade-offs each entails (interpretability vs. expressivity; explainability vs. adaptability), the contexts in which each is needed, and the intrinsic and post-hoc tools available for achieving them. Throughout, we emphasize that machine-learned models are subject to the same scientific questions as classical models, differing only in scale, and that interpretability and explainability are best understood as deliberate modeling choices rather than inherent properties. We also emphasize the importance of task specification and intervention plans as a core aspect of model design.

We propose a predict-optimize-explain framework that uses gradient-based sample generation to interpret various portfolio models by identifying macroeconomic conditions that induce specified portfolio outcomes. Unlike traditional feature-importance methods, this approach directly probes decision pipelines (predictive models coupled with portfolio optimization) by constructing economically meaningful what-if questions. We focus on four such questions: under what macroeconomic conditions a predict-then-optimize pipeline closes or reverses its return gap with a predict-and-optimize pipeline; what conditions lead a pipeline to diversify rather than concentrate its allocation; when a pipeline trained on calm markets overtakes one trained through crises; and what conditions would let a pipeline match a benchmark return. These examples illustrate how our framework uncovers key behavioral differences between various decision pipelines. Beyond these cases, the proposed framework is flexible and can support a wide range of probing questions tailored to specific portfolio objectives. Our findings highlight the value of integrating prediction, optimization, and explanation to produce more robust and transparent portfolio strategies.

Geographic implicit neural representations (INRs) learn to map any coordinate on Earth to a location embedding, implicitly encoding geospatial data into the weights of a neural network. Location embeddings are widely used off the shelf as general-purpose geospatial representations, yet users lack principled tools to audit what geographic or semantic information these embeddings capture. In this work, we analyze the information content of geographic INRs through their location embeddings. We decompose these embeddings into human-interpretable features$\unicode{x2014}$namely, (i) sparse latent concepts, (ii) natural language concepts, and (iii) visual features. The latent concept embeddings are learned using sparse autoencoders. To recover natural language concepts, we apply sparse linear concept embeddings (SpLiCE) over a predefined geospatial dictionary. Finally, visual features are extracted using saliency maps derived from CLIP Surgery. We show that location embeddings can be decomposed into human-interpretable representations while retaining high reconstruction capability, revealing interpretable geographic structures such as forests, deserts, and urban features. Across methods, sparse decompositions expose systematic differences in encoded information, ranging from urban structures to broader biome and climate signals, and pretraining-space saliency maps further highlight complementary features such as roads and landmarks. We hope this work provides a first step toward interpretable geospatial representations.

Explainability techniques are used to assess the output of various deep learning models. This is especially true in healthcare, where models need to be trusted and decisions justified. Explainability (XAI) tools use heuristics which often add signal noise to the explanation "core". It is not always obvious what is signal from the model and what is noise from the XAI. We propose the use of spectral entropy as a measure of noise in XAI output. We demonstrate its usefulness in the context of classifying arrhythmias in an ECG dataset with different post hoc explainability techniques.

Objective: This study aims to improve the reliability and robustness of medical named entity recognition (NER) in Chinese atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical texts through explanation-guided learning. Methods: We propose a stability and boundary-aware explanation-guided NER framework. Perturbation-based analysis is used to evaluate explanation stability and entity boundary sensitivity. An adaptive fusion strategy dynamically combines local and global explanation to generate more reliable token-level explanations. The fused explanation signals are further incorporated into model training through stability, boundary-aware, and consistency constraints. Results: Experiments on Chinese AD NER datasets show that the proposed framework improves explanation robustness and achieves consistent performance gains across multiple NER models. The adaptive fusion strategy also provides more stable explanations and stronger boundary perception than individual explanation methods. Conclusion: The proposed method effectively integrates reliable explanation signals into medical NER training, improving both recognition performance and explanation reliability. The framework provides a practical and generalizable solution for explainable medical NER and offers reliable support for downstream clinical decision-making and medical knowledge applications.

Detecting hallucinations in clinical text is increasingly framed as an explainability problem: systems should not merely flag an unreliable response but point to the offending span. Architectures built around knowledge-graph (KG) triple decomposition are marketed for exactly this auditability, yet their localization ability is typically assumed rather than measured. We introduce MedHal-Loc, a benchmark and metric for localization faithfulness -- whether a detector's top-ranked error unit actually overlaps the erroneous span. The controlled subset comprises 300 PubMedQA-derived statements with single, span-level errors injected across four localizable types (entity substitution, relation error, mechanism misattribution, invention), yielding gold spans by construction; a complementary natural subset documents that real hallucinations are dominated by diffuse conclusion-flips that resist span localization (a human expert accepted 1/18 candidate spans). Evaluating four fine-grained paradigms, we find that NLI-per-clause, consistency-per-sentence, and the dedicated span detector FAVA all localize well above chance, whereas an elaborate KG-triple pipeline localizes no better than chance (+3.3pp, n.s.), bottlenecked by ~59% entity-extraction coverage -- despite competitive detection F1 (0.609). Detection competence does not imply faithful localization; architectural explainability must be validated, not presumed.

Dysarthria severity assessment is essential for therapy planning and longitudinal monitoring, yet manual perceptual rating is time-consuming and variable across clinicians. Although deep learning models achieve strong performance, their black-box nature limits clinical adoption. Existing speech explainability methods typically provide acoustic feature importance scores that are difficult for end-users to interpret. We propose an influence-based, instance-level explainability framework that explains each decision through supportive and competing training samples. Using gradient-based influence approximations, we compute per-utterance influence scores to identify supportive and competing training samples for each prediction. Controlled deletion experiments from 5 to 20 percent validate the explanations, showing that removing highly influential samples systematically shifts predictions. This approach provides auditable explanations by linking decisions to perceptible reference cases.

Key Performance Measurement (KPM) forecasting is essential for proactive network management of 5G and next-generation telecom networks. However, existing machine learning (ML) approaches face significant limitations in scalability and explainability, restricting their effectiveness in real-world deployments. We propose TelcoAgent, a foundation model-based framework that enables accurate, scalable, and explainable forecasting of multiple KPMs across diverse network cells without the need for site-specific training. Specifically, the framework comprises three key components: (i) an automated three-agent pipeline that constructs a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) knowledge graph directly from specification documents, (ii) a scalable, time-series foundation model (TSFM)-based prediction pipeline to deliver accurate, zero-shot forecasting, and finally (iii) a reasoning and explanation pipeline that provides actionable, domain-grounded diagnostics. Evaluated using a 3-month, real-world, city-scale 5G KPM dataset from a U.S.-based network operator, TelcoAgent demonstrates high forecasting accuracy for all 7 considered KPMs per cell across 200 cells, while delivering explainable insights and actionable instructions to address network degradations.

As LLMs acquire stronger reasoning capabilities, deceptive behavior becomes an increasingly serious safety concern. Existing deception monitors either score visible transcripts or derive scalar probe scores from representation vectors, leaving little inspectable evidence about why a response is suspicious. We introduce STATEWITNESS, an activation explainer for deception auditing. A separate decoder reads a target model's hidden states, then answers natural-language queries or emits structured reports about them. We evaluate STATEWITNESS on two target reasoning LLMs across seven deception datasets. STATEWITNESS reaches 0.916 mean AUROC, a relative gain of 11.6% over the best black-box text monitor and 25.0% over the best activation-probe baseline under the same evaluation protocol. When combined with existing monitors, STATEWITNESS reduces missed deceptive examples in simple threshold ensembles. Beyond scalar detection, the decoder returns query-level answers, schema reports, and token- or sentence-level evidence traces for human inspection. We view this interface as a potential building block for broader interpretability and alignment tools.

This study proposes a domain-specific LLM-based Visual Explanation Evaluation Framework for assessing Grad-CAM explanations in facial skin disease diagnosis models. While previous studies have primarily focused on improving classification performance through data augmentation techniques, relatively few studies have systematically examined whether model explanations are grounded in clinically relevant lesion regions. In this study, geometric augmentation, color-based augmentation, and mixed augmentation strategies were applied to facial skin disease classification models based on EfficientNet-B0, MobileNetV3, and ResNet18. Grad-CAM was employed to generate visual explanations representing the models' decision-making processes. Furthermore, an LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation framework was designed using GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.5 Flash, and Claude Sonnet 4.6 to assess Grad-CAM explanations from the perspectives of lesion localization and explanation trustworthiness. To improve evaluation consistency and clinical grounding, a progressive prompt engineering strategy was introduced, incorporating evaluation rubrics, clinical knowledge, penalty rules, and structured output formats.

Algorithmic explanations are intended to help stakeholders understand opaque algorithmic decisions, but in practice, they often fall short. First, the meaning of algorithmic explanations is often not what one might intuitively expect, so expert knowledge is required to interpret them correctly. Second, recent work has shown that popular explanation algorithms are uninformative about the behavior of complex decision functions. Together, these issues create a gap between what explanations appear to convey and what they actually provide. In this work, we propose Explanation Cards for Explanation Algorithms, which augment standard explanations with complementary information about robustness and validity, as well as clear instructions for interpretation. The complementary information can render otherwise uninformative explanations practically useful, while also helping to detect cases where they are not. Importantly, the interpretation instructions in explanation cards shift responsibility from users to providers: Rather than expecting users to recognize what can and cannot be concluded from an explanation, providers must make this explicit upfront. Using counterfactual explanations and SHAP as examples, we demonstrate how providers can construct explanation cards and that these cards provide users with the guidance needed for sound interpretation. We further argue that explanation cards offer a practical means of operationalising the explainability provisions of the EU AI Act. Overall, explanation cards are a significant step toward making explanation algorithms fit for real-world use cases.

Speech deepfake detection is predominantly treated as an opaque classification task where all temporal frames are aggregated equally. This ignores that different phonetic categories carry vastly different amounts of discriminative information. To address this, we propose a phoneme-guided cross-attention framework that transforms detection into an interpretable, phonetically grounded process. We factorize the spoofing posterior $P(\text{spoofed}\mid X, W)$, conditioned on the acoustic representation $X$ and the phonetic posteriorgram $W$. The resulting factorization can be written as $P(\text{spoofed} \mid X, W) = \sum_{i=1}^{M} w_i \cdot P(\text{spoofed} \mid X, Z = z_i)$, where $M$ denotes the number of phonetic classes, $P(\text{spoofed} \mid X, Z = z_i)$ is the spoofing probability for the $i$-th phonetic class $z_i$ conditioned on $X$, and each $w_i$ is the prevalence of phonetic class $z_i$ in the utterance. Our transformer-based architecture instantiates this through a cross-attention block in which phonetic queries selectively probe information in acoustic keys and values, with softmax-normalized pooling supplying explicit phone-presence weights. Unlike prior approaches that rely heavily on post-hoc explainability methods, our framework offers phonetic-explainability-by-design. We evaluate the framework on an LJSpeech-derived corpus, ASVspoof 2019 LA, and ASVspoof 5 Track 1. Per-phone importance rankings reveal that discriminative power concentrates on articulatory categories that generative models struggle to reproduce faithfully. Stops, fricatives, affricates, nasals, and silence-boundary closures rank most discriminative, while periodic vowels and semivowels rank lower. Beyond competitive performance, our model provides structural interpretability, yielding an inspectable per-articulatory category breakdown of the final verdict.

How to define a good explanation is a long-standing philosophical debate which has found recent renewed interest in the context of AI outputs. Explainability is crucial for AI adoption in many contexts, but in order to produce good explanations of AI systems, we must first have an understanding of what good explanations are. In this paper we propose a definition inspired by the notion of counterfactual explanations, however we argue that one must also take into account the interlocutor's prior beliefs in each fact that could be offered in an explanation. We explore the ramifications of this definition for AI explainability and, in particular, why LLM outputs are difficult to produce good explanations for.

Transformer-based automatic speech recognition (ASR) models such as Whisper are highly accurate, but their predictions remain difficult to interpret. Existing explainable AI (XAI) methods often lack faithfulness and precise temporal grounding. We propose Listening with Entropy-guided Attention for Faithful explainability (LEAF-X), a model-intrinsic XAI framework for transformer-based ASR. LEAF-X combines entropy-guided attention weighting, multi-layer attention rollout, and optional causal ablations to identify low-entropy, high-impact heads and layers, producing sparse token-to-frame attributions. Unlike perturbation-based explainers or raw attention maps, LEAF-X exploits the internal structure of encoder-decoder and speech-augmented decoder-only models to generate explanations that better reflect model computation. Results show 32% improved faithfulness, 35-39% stronger locality/sparsity, and the most stable attributions, supporting more transparent and auditable ASR.

Drug-target interaction (DTI) and affinity (DTA) predictors increasingly achieve strong benchmark scores, yet their internal use of sequence, fingerprint, and graph features often remains opaque. We present an interpretability audit of BridgeDPI architecture on three different datasets including Gao, Human, and C.elegans. This study combines gradient-based attributions -- integrated gradients, saliency, layer-wise relevance propagation, SmoothGrad, and SmoothGrad-IG -- with feature-wise occlusion ablation and strict intersection consensus across methods to reduce single-explainer bias. We summarize sensitivity and signed effects at raw inputs, at the bridge similarity scaffold, and through the graph convolution, including edge-level sensitivities and targeted edge removals. The results show that explainability is most informative when treated as model criticism: it reveals modality dominance, padding and special-token artifacts, dataset-dependent cooperative versus suppressive effects across layers, and chemistry-consistent fragment and composition motifs where methods agree. These analyses do not substitute for structural or experimental ground truth, yet they can provide testable hypotheses for downstream validation in computational drug discovery pipelines. More broadly, applying modern XAI to contemporary DTI/DTA models is still an early pass over the rich structure implicit in trained weights and data -- yet even this first layer of scrutiny already helps researchers relate predictions to drug- and target-side representations and to prioritize external validation.

Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is an aggressive retinal disease and a leading cause of global blindness, yet its clinical management is currently hindered by the black-box nature of diagnostic AI. While deep learning models achieve high classification accuracy, there is a critical lack of explainability methods capable of detailing the exact anatomical landmarks and lesion distributions that lead to a clinical decision for DR. Therefore, we propose HSQ-VLM, a novel quadrant segmentation pipeline on fundus images that utilizes a Landmark-Anchored Cartesian Cross-Attention mechanism to unify visual feature extraction with structured clinical reasoning. Unlike traditional methods that rely on arbitrary image partitioning, our pipeline implements 4-quadrant Topological Latent Partitioning (TLP) to dynamically align retinal features with a fovea-centered coordinate system. This allows the Vision-Language Model to generate natural language reports that quantify pathology with anatomical precision. On a dataset of 3,500 high-resolution fundus images, this innovative methodology achieved a lesion detection sensitivity of 99.6% for hemorrhages and 96.4% for microaneurysms, while demonstrating a significant reduction in boundary-ambiguity errors compared to standard segmentation baselines.

Training deep neural networks for clinical time-series analysis is computationally demanding, yet many healthcare settings lack the resources required for repeated model development and deployment. This challenge is particularly evident in electrocardiogram classification, where large datasets and long training schedules make efficiency practically important. Progressive Data Dropout reduces training cost by excluding samples from gradient updates once they are learned, but it relies on model confidence and may retain samples that are difficult due to noise or ambiguity rather than useful signal. In this work, we introduce ERTS, an explainability-based reliability training signal for efficient ECG classification. ERTS uses explanation quality during training to distinguish between informative and unreliable uncertainty. Building on progressive data selection, we compute Grad-CAM attention maps for candidate samples and derive a focus score that measures whether model predictions are supported by coherent and localised patterns. Samples with low focus are filtered out, while those with meaningful attention are prioritised for gradient updates. We evaluate ERTS across three ECG datasets and multiple backbone architectures, showing consistent improvements in macro-F1 alongside reduced effective training cost. These results suggest that explanation quality can serve as a practical signal for improving both efficiency and reliability in clinical time-series learning. Code will be released.

As artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) models become integral to network operations, their lack of transparency poses a significant barrier to operator trust. Existing explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques often fail to bridge this gap for non-specialists, producing technical outputs that are difficult to translate into actionable insights. This paper presents a framework specifically designed to address this shortcoming. It leverages a moderately sized large language model (LLM) and extends beyond the standard use of SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) feature influence values. The framework employs a structured prompt enriched with mutual feature interaction data to generate human-understandable natural language explanations. To validate our framework, we performed an empirical evaluation on an optical quality of transmission (QoT) estimation use case with human evaluators. We collected independent performance evaluations from specialists, which showed a high inter-evaluator agreement. Compared to a state-of-the-art baseline that uses only SHAP feature influence values in a straightforward prompt, our approach improves the explanation usefulness and scope by 12.2% and 6.2%, while achieving 97.5% correctness.

Deepfake speech detectors often output a single score without explaining why an audio sample is flagged, where in the signal the evidence lies, or what cues drive the decision. We propose an audio-native explainability pipeline using Integrated Gradients on time-aligned self-supervised representations to localize decision evidence over time. We apply the proposed method to three WavLM-based detectors (AASIST, CA-MHFA, SLS) on ASVspoof 5 and manually annotate the highest-attribution regions to provide a semantic meaning of the most important cues. Despite similar performance, the detectors rely on different cues: AASIST emphasizes non-speech/environment cues, CA-MHFA focuses on localized phoneme artifacts, and SLS relies on word boundaries and spectral integrity. We move beyond speculative reasoning and validate our findings by causal masking of the primary detector cues. Observed performance degradation further supports the explained detector semantics.

Machine learning is increasingly used in critical domains, where both predictions and their associated confidence levels influence important decisions. To enhance transparency in such scenarios, it is important to understand why a model is confident or uncertain about its predictions. Recent logic-based approaches provide abductive explanations, minimal subsets of features sufficient to preserve the predicted class, with correctness guarantees. However, these methods focus solely on classification behavior and may produce explanations that cover instances with low predictive confidence. In this work, we introduce the concept of Minimum Confidence Threshold (MCT), which quantifies the weakest confidence guarantee provided by an abductive explanation. Building upon this concept, we propose confidence-aware abductive explanations, which preserve not only the predicted class but also a user-specified confidence guarantee. We formulate MCT computation as an optimization problem and introduce an algorithm for generating minimal explanations that satisfy a desired confidence threshold. We evaluate the proposed framework on boosted trees for binary classification, although the approach is applicable to other machine learning models that provide confidence scores. Experimental results show that traditional abductive explanations often provide substantially weaker confidence guarantees than the confidence associated with the explained instance itself. In contrast, confidence-aware explanations consistently improve the minimum confidence guaranteed by an explanation while requiring only a modest increase in explanation length. These properties make the proposed approach particularly suitable for applications where both predictive correctness and confidence are essential for trustworthy decision making.

The growing complexity of self-adaptive and self-organising systems, fuelled by advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI), has made them increasingly difficult to understand and trust. While Explainable AI aims to provide insight into AI decision-making, a more advanced goal is for systems to explain themselves - an ability referred to as Self-Explainability (SX). This article presents a systematic literature review on SX, analysing existing approaches, including their domains, targets, and evaluation methods. The review develops a unified definition and taxonomy of SX and introduces Levels of Self-Explainability, providing a framework for positioning current and future research. Our results show that most SX approaches remain conceptual, with few practical implementations. Moreover, there is currently no formal or de facto standard for evaluating SX, highlighting a major research gap. This work thus establishes a foundation and roadmap for advancing Self-Explainability in complex systems.

We propose Differences in Detection (DnD), an intuitive method to compare two object detection models. Based on the same matching algorithm, it complements the standard metrics of mean Average Precision ($mAP$) and TIDE error analysis with the ability to compare two models directly. More specifically, we calculate the intersection of ground truth labels that are recognized by both models, followed by the corresponding difference sets and the complement set of ground truth labels that are missed by both models. The resulting comparison is more direct and intuitive than a comparison of independent summary statistics. It reveals individual and shared mistakes and becomes particularly interesting when combined with error types. In this case, the differences in detection errors can be analyzed naturally in a standard confusion matrix. While valuable in itself, we believe that one of the best applications of DnD is to guide explainability methods such as ODAM towards metric-relevant examples, grounded in structured subsets. The code for our method is available here: https://github.com/JohannesTheo/differences-in-detection

Huntington's disease (HD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that affects motor, cognitive, and behavioral functions, where accurate characterization of disease progression remains essential to improve patient outcome and quality of life. Unsupervised machine learning (ML) approaches have demonstrated the ability to uncover disease progression trajectories and meaningful latent stages from longitudinal data; however, their limited interpretability restricts clinical trust and translation. We extend a previously proposed ML-based disease staging framework by applying an explainability analysis to the extracted feature representations and discovered disease stages. Applied to the Enroll-HD dataset, we first project the learned representations into a lower-dimensional space to intuitively assess whether the resulting clusters align with the progression of established clinical measures. We then use saliency maps to identify the clinical features that most strongly contribute to the learned embeddings over time. Finally, we train a surrogate classifier and apply SHAP to quantify feature importance for cluster assignments and to analyze which clinical variables drive transitions between disease stages. The explainability analysis indicates that the learned embeddings capture clinically meaningful disease structure, aligning with established motor and functional severity scores and exhibiting progressive deterioration across clusters. Within this analysis, SHAP reveals a stratification of disease stages, ranging from early cognitive-motor impairment to severe functional dependency, consistent with known clinical progression patterns, while also highlighting intra-stage variability.

Large language models are rapidly becoming infrastructural components in high-stakes institutional settings, including public administration, legal reasoning, and healthcare, where opacity is not merely inconvenient but institutionally and legally untenable. Existing approaches to explainability are predominantly post-hoc, offering unstable, non-contestable accounts that have no formal relationship to the reasoning process that produced the output. We argue that the problem is not the absence of explanation but the absence of structured reasoning in the first place. This paper makes the case for a fundamentally different architecture, which we call the Glassbox Framework, in which Bayesian networks serve as transparent, ante-hoc mediation layers for generative models. Bayesian networks encode domain knowledge, causal assumptions, and probabilistic dependencies before inference occurs, enabling auditable reasoning traces, uncertainty quantification, and contestable outputs. We characterise the architecture of this framework and ground it in a benefit eligibility scenario, identifying the foundational challenges spanning semantic alignment, dynamic model construction, probabilistic grounding, and human governance that must be solved to realise it at scale. By shifting from post-hoc explanation to ante-hoc probabilistic mediation, this work outlines a principled path toward AI systems that are not only powerful but fundamentally accountable.

Explanations of multiple instance learning (MIL) models are widely used for validation and discovery in digital histopathology. Existing methods primarily rely on heatmaps that highlight influential regions but do not explain how evidence from different tissue regions is combined to produce a prediction. This limits interpretability, especially when decisions depend on interactions between tissue features. We introduce Symbolic explainable MIL (Symb-xMIL), a post-hoc explanation framework that quantifies how a MIL model's behavior aligns with human-readable decision rules, expressed as logical relationships (e.g., AND, OR, NOT) between input features. These alignment scores reveal semantic patterns underlying the model's predictions. We evaluate Symb-xMIL on synthetic and real-world histopathology datasets. On synthetic MIL data, Symb-xMIL reliably recovers ground-truth logical rules. In a clinical tumor detection task, the best-aligned rules uncover heterogeneous decision patterns and expose hidden model errors. On an HPV-prediction task on TCGA-HNSCC, a cohort of head and neck cancer, our framework refines patient survival stratification beyond HPV status with potential clinical relevance. Overall, Symb-xMIL extends MIL explainability beyond visual attribution toward structured, rule-based reasoning, enabling more transparent and semantically grounded interpretation of model predictions.

Multiple machine learning models can achieve near-equivalent predictive performance on the same task, yet provide divergent feature-based explanations. This is called the Rashomon effect of (explainable) machine learning, and it raises the question of which explanations, if any, are trustworthy. We propose a framework based on metamorphic testing that assesses explanation faithfulness without requiring ground-truth labels by exploring attributed feature importance from post-hoc explanation methods. Five metamorphic relations formalize expected consistency properties between model behavior and feature attributions. We apply this general framework to two tabular regression datasets and two post-hoc explainers (SHAP and LIME) to demonstrate the approach. The framework offers a practical, model-agnostic tool for selecting accurate models with reliable and trustworthy explanations.

Causal graphs provide a high-level language for making mechanisms transparent. Recent work uses Large Language Models (LLMs) to recover causal graphs of external-world processes. Instead, in this paper, we use causal graphs to model LLM inference itself, providing stakeholders with a transparent view of how the model perceives and organizes high-level concepts to produce a prediction. We propose a four-phase method for constructing such graphs. Given a target LLM and a set of textual examples, our method discovers class-discriminative, human-interpretable concepts and maps each input to LLM-perceived concept states. We then introduce an MCMC-inspired counterfactual augmentation procedure that expands the sparse observational data through chains of counterfactuals. This enables stable causal discovery with $σ$-CG, yielding informative, interpretable graphs. We apply our method to three LLMs across disease diagnosis, sentiment analysis, and LLM-as-a-judge classification tasks. We evaluate the learned graphs for predictive fidelity and structural stability, and the MCMC-inspired augmentation for convergence and downstream utility. Our results show that the discovered causal graphs capture meaningful dependencies consistent with LLMs' reasoning. Together, this paper provides a foundation for concept-level explainability of LLMs.

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across a range of applications involving graph-structured data, particularly in high-stakes domains. However, the opaque nature of their decision-making processes limits their trustworthiness and broader adoption. Existing post-hoc explanation methods aim to improve explainability by identifying subgraphs that influence GNN predictions and adopt mixup strategies to alleviate the out-of-distribution (OOD) issue caused by using subgraphs for prediction. Yet, these approaches typically rely on soft masks, which are inherently unable to fully eliminate label-irrelevant information, allowing redundant structures to leak into the mixup process and hindering the resolution of the OOD problem, thereby degrading explanation fidelity. In this work, we propose HPME, a Hard-Perturbation Mixup Explanation framework grounded in a generalized Graph Information Bottleneck, which leverages graph pooling to extract discrete explanatory subgraphs and to yield an information-capacity bound to thoroughly compress label-irrelevant components. Furthermore, we introduce a novel mixup strategy built upon structure-level replacement, generating in-distribution explanations to effectively mitigate the distribution shift. Extensive experiments on diverse tasks demonstrate that HPME achieves state-of-the-art performance in generating robust and interpretable explanations across both synthetic and real-world datasets.

Trust in a decision-making system requires both safety guarantees and the ability to interpret and understand its behavior. This is particularly important for learned systems, whose decision-making processes are often highly opaque. Shielding is a prominent model-based technique for enforcing safety in reinforcement learning. However, because shields are automatically synthesized using rigorous formal methods, their decisions are often similarly difficult for humans to interpret. Recently, decision trees became customary to represent controllers and policies. However, since shields are inherently non-deterministic, their decision tree representations become too large to be explainable in practice. To address this challenge, we propose a novel approach for explainable safe RL that enhances trust by providing human-interpretable explanations of the shield's decisions. Our method represents the shielding policy as a hierarchy of decision trees, offering top-down, case-based explanations. At design time, we use a world model to analyze the safety risks of executing actions in given states. Based on this analysis, we construct both the shield and a high-level decision tree that classifies states into risk categories (safe, critical, dangerous, unsafe), explaining why a situation may be safety-critical. At runtime, we generate localized decision trees that explain which actions are allowed and why others are deemed unsafe. Our method facilitates explainability of the safety aspect in safe-by-shielding reinforcement learning, requires no additional information beyond what is already used for shielding, incurs minimal overhead, and integrates readily into existing shielded RL pipelines. In our experiments, we compute explanations using decision trees that are several orders of magnitude smaller than the original shield.

With the increasing development of Vision-Language Models, it becomes imperative that their predictions are readily explainable to relevant stakeholders. However, the field of explainability has not kept pace with the multimodal surge. While recent Multimodal Explainable AI (MxAI) methods generate explanations to attribute the interaction between different modalities, current evaluation protocols lack the ground truth required to distinguish between true cross-modal reasoning (e.g., spatial composition) and shallow cross-modal shortcuts (e.g., Bag-of-Words attribute matching). It remains unknown whether MxAI methods faithfully capture synergistic interactions or merely hallucinate reasoning on models acting as simple feature detectors. In this paper, we introduce GridVQA-X, the first diagnostic framework specifically designed to evaluate cross-modal explainability. Unlike natural datasets, GridVQA-X leverages a closed-world synthesis logic to generate unique, mathematically guaranteed explanations. We utilize this controlled environment to train paired ground-truth models on identical architectures: $M_{\text{pure}}$, which learns robust spatial-relational reasoning and $M_{\text{spur}}$, which is structurally forced to rely on cross-modal shortcuts. This behavioral divergence creates a rigorous testbed: a faithful explainer must report distinct reasoning pathways for each model. Our findings reveal that widely used methods fail to distinguish between models relying on genuine spatial-relational reasoning and those exploiting cross-modal shortcuts, highlighting a critical gap in capturing true cross-modal synergy and misrepresenting how multimodal models actually make decisions.

Autonomous vehicles offer the potential for safer and more efficient mobility, yet public trust remains limited due to the lack of transparency in their decision-making. This work addresses this issue by combining deep reinforcement learning (DRL) for adaptive driving control with large language model (LLM)-based explainability modules designed to communicate agent behavior to passengers. DRL agents were trained in simulation using a Dueling Double Deep Q-Network to follow distinct driving requests: \textit{fast}, \textit{comfort}, and \textit{stop}. They demonstrated stable learning, safe compliance with traffic rules, and reliable switching between modes within a single trip. In parallel, LLM modules were introduced to interpret passenger requests, determine when explanations were needed, and generate concise, safety-oriented justifications. Results show that this framework, serving as a proof of concept for integrating RL decision-making and LLMs, balances safety, adaptability, and explainability, and is most effective when requests are delayed or overridden due to safety constraints.

Heterogeneous graph neural networks (HGNNs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in modeling complex relational data, however their interpretability in high-stakes applications remains a critical challenge. Existing explanation methods suffer from two major limitations: on the one hand, the generated explanations fail to reflect the inherent semantic hierarchy of HGNNs, resulting in a lack of fidelity to the model's internal decision-making mechanism; on the other hand, feature explanations often rely on complex search or perturbation mechanisms, leading to excessive computational complexity and poor efficiency. To address these issues, we propose HiSE, a lightweight feature-oriented interpretable model for HGNNs. HiSE achieves semantically aware feature explanations through hierarchical semantic modeling: at the semantic level, local surrogate models based on the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) are employed to learn sparse feature representations under each semantic view; at the cross-semantic level, the contributions of different semantic views are adaptively characterized via KL divergence to produce a unified explanation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that HiSE outperforms existing methods in terms of fidelity, robustness, and cross-semantic explanation capability, while its lightweight framework incurs low computational overhead, enabling efficient application to large-scale, complex real-world heterogeneous graphs.

Visual explainability for object detection remains challenging due to the multi-instance nature of detection. Existing approaches predominantly adopt post-hoc paradigms, such as gradient-based or perturbation-based explanation methods, to interpret pretrained detectors. However, these methods require additional gradient computation or repeated model inference, resulting in limited efficiency. To address this issue, we propose an End-to-end Instance-specific Visual Explanation framework (EIVE) that directly generates instance-level saliency maps following the forward pass of Detection Transformer (DETR)-like models. Specifically, we reformulate the cross-attention mechanism in the decoder as an instance-level feature attribution pathway, so that the cross-attention of each object query corresponds to the visual attribution of its predicted instance. Based on this formulation, we design a cross-layer hybrid consensus fusion (CLHCF) module to aggregate cross-attention signals across decoder layers, producing stable and compact explanations. The explanation process of EIVE requires neither gradient computation nor input perturbation, yielding high computational efficiency, and applies to single- and multi-scale DETR-like object detectors. Finally, we present an attention-aware joint training strategy (AAJTS) as a training-oriented application, which imposes spatial constraints on cross-attention patterns to encourage stable and concentrated attribution representations, thereby improving both interpretability and detection performance. Experiments on MS COCO 2017, ExDark, and Cityscapes demonstrate that EIVE produces high-quality instance-level saliency maps and achieves performance comparable to, or better than, state-of-the-art post-hoc methods across standard metrics, while substantially improving explanation efficiency. Code is available at https://github.com/xjlDestiny/EIVE.git.

To understand how a neural network (NN) functions and makes predictions, it has become increasingly clear that analyzing only the input domain is insufficient -- one must also examine its internal inference mechanisms to capture the complete picture. To explain the internal inference mechanisms of such models, it is essential to analyze the importance of latent representations for a given task. In this paper, we propose the \emph{normalized relevance measure} (NRM) framework -- a novel general explanation procedure that attributes relevance to \emph{arbitrary sets of neurons across layers of arbitrary architectures}. In the NRM framework, relevance of selected neurons is explicitly defined as a normalized signed measure, constructed using simple operations -- marginalization and conditioning based on additive and multiplicative laws -- in analogy to the probability measures. The normalization property further guarantees comparability across layers. The NRM framework subsumes existing propagation-based explanation algorithms by explicitly identifying the underlying quantity being computed. We demonstrate the utility of the framework in computer vision applications, where joint relevance analysis across multiple layers reveals key information flows in VGG16 networks. Overall, the NRM framework provides a general, mathematically grounded approach to understanding how modern NNs propagate information, offering a versatile and broadly applicable foundation for explainable artificial intelligence.

Human disagreement is ubiquitous and well-known in labeling. However, variation in explanations, captured through token-level human rationales, remains far less explored. At the same time, it is unclear how to best evaluate human labels and rationales -- or even how to best aggregate rationales beyond majority vote -- in light of this variation. Yet, rationales may provide additional insights into the richness of human reasoning, that may differ in style, values and interpretations -- especially in subjective NLP tasks like hate speech detection. In this work, we unify diverse models, training strategies, loss functions, and existing evaluation metrics under a single protocol by systematically re-implementing them across different label and rationale representation spaces. Classification metrics are organized around two key properties -- predictive and distributional -- while explainability metrics through three complementary dimensions: plausibility, faithfulness, and complexity. In this unified supervision framework, we evaluate model behavior across classification and explainability metrics, as well as metric sensitivity to the choice of label (hard and soft) and rationale representation space (hard, intermediate and soft). Results show that both hard and soft metrics favor softer representations, highlighting their effectiveness in capturing variation and the need to rethink evaluation in subjective NLP.

Malaria remains a leading cause of mortality in sub-Saharan Africa, where scarce diagnostic infrastructure makes timely, accurate diagnosis particularly challenging. While deep learning offers a compelling path toward automated malaria screening, clinical adoption is hindered by computational cost and opacity in decision-making. This work benchmarks four deep learning models spanning a wide range of designed design architectures and model capacities on the NLM-Malaria dataset, jointly evaluating predictive performance, robustness, and post-hoc explainability. We find that lightweight, efficient-by-design models match their heavier counterparts in predictive performance, and the Friedman test confirms no statistically significant performance differences. CAM-based XAI methods consistently localize diagnostically relevant regions, while fine-grained attribution methods produce less targeted explanations, particularly with heavier backbones. Robustness evaluation under three types of image corruption further reveals that model confidence degrades faster than accuracy, providing a practical signal for human review. However, no XAI method is robust to corruption, with explanation reliability degrading at noise levels plausible in clinical practice, even when predictions remain accurate. These findings support the deployment of lightweight architectures for malaria diagnosis in resource-constrained settings, while highlighting the vulnerability of post-hoc explanations as an important consideration for responsible clinical deployment.

Graph Machine Learning as a Service (GMLaaS) platforms increasingly implement explainability interfaces to meet regulatory transparency requirements. However, this transparency creates exploitable vulnerabilities for model extraction attacks. We present the first model extraction attack specifically designed for graph classification under strict black-box constraints where the attacker observes only discrete class labels and binary explanation masks (no probability scores, gradients, or confidence values). Our method (1) uses model explanation outputs to guide Monte Carlo edge sensitivity estimation toward decision boundaries, with Hoeffding concentration guarantees on estimation accuracy and (2) exploits explanation subgraphs to efficiently narrow the boundary search space. Extensive experiments on benchmark graph datasets across multiple domains demonstrate our method's superiority over comparable baselines. These findings demonstrate that such explainability interfaces create exploitable attack surfaces, informing both defensive mechanisms and policy frameworks for explainable AI mandates. The implementation code is provided in https://github.com/LabRAI/XSTEAL/.

Clustering is an unsupervised technique for grouping data points by similarity. While explainability methods exist for supervised machine learning, they are not directly applicable to clustering, making it challenging to understand cluster assignments. This interpretability gap is particularly evident in the popular density-based method DBSCAN, which assigns points as inliers (cluster members in dense regions) or outliers (noise points in sparse regions). DBSCAN does not provide insight into why a particular point receives its assignment or whether its assignment is robust to small changes in the data. To address the lack of explainability, we introduce ExDBSCAN, a density-aware, post-hoc explanation method. ExDBSCAN offers actionable counterfactual explanations, with theoretical guarantees for validity. It generates multiple counterfactuals using a density connected weighted graph, adopting a physics-inspired model that repels counterfactual candidates from one another (diversity), while pulling them toward the instance to explain (proximity). Empirical evaluation on 30 tabular datasets comparing against four baselines shows that ExDBSCAN outperforms all baselines while attaining perfect validity and retrieving diverse, proximal counterfactuals.

The adversarial robustness of attributions is a fundamental requirement for reliable explainability in deep learning, yet existing approaches typically rely on computationally expensive explicit regularization. In this work, we show that attribution robustness can arise implicitly from the learning dynamics of standard stochastic gradient descent. We theoretically motivate this effect through connections between parameter-space and input-space curvature, and validate it across architectures, datasets, and attribution methods, with negligible computational overhead. In contrast, we prove that such robustness gains often does not transfer to attention-based attribution under softmax normalization, due to inherent entropy constraints, and we validate this limitation experimentally. Finally, we show that replacing softmax attention with kernel-based attention restores the robustness gains in transformer models. Our results highlight learning dynamics as a principled and practical mechanism for robust explainability, and reveal fundamental limitations of attention-based attribution under normalization.

In-context learning (ICL) enables multimodal large language models (MLLMs) to classify images from a few labelled examples. Yet, how these models use the provided context remains opaque. While Chain-of-Thought prompting is widely used, recent work argues that it may not reflect true internal computation. In this paper, we systematically evaluate the concept-based explainability of frozen MLLMs under few-shot ICL using five conditions of increasing formal rigour, ranging from baseline classification to Description Logics (DL) axiom generation. Evaluating four state-of-the-art MLLMs via an independent LLM-as-a-judge pipeline, we demonstrate that explaining is genuinely harder than predicting alone. Surprisingly, forcing models to generate formally structured, concept-based explanations degrades predictive accuracy monotonically (from 93.8% to 90.1%), contradicting the assumption that explicit reasoning universally aids performance. However, when models successfully articulate class-discriminative visual features, explanation quality strongly correlates with correct predictions. Our findings suggest that while MLLMs excel at visual classification, they lack the specific instruction-tuning required for formal, machine-verifiable explainability.

Evolutionary computation offers a variety of tools to solve complex real-world optimization problems. However, research often focuses on smaller, simplified problems and optimization algorithms that sometimes miss expectations in real-world scenarios. Additionally, trust in the applied algorithm and the solutions it provides is often essential in such settings, but requires an understanding of the search process itself. This leads to evolutionary computation often not being seriously considered by practitioners in many application contexts, among them physics-based modeling. In this article, techniques from evolutionary computation are detailed that can alleviate these problems. First, five real-world physics-based optimization problems are introduced and described by domain experts. For each of these, the requirements for the evolutionary algorithm regarding performance and explainability to increase trust and usability are presented. We found that all domain experts expect fast convergence to a good solution and want some explanations for how the results were formed, while other requirements strongly depend on the respective problem. Finally, we present existing approaches that can be leveraged to improve those aspects of evolutionary algorithms but have to our knowledge never been employed in complex real-world scenarios. This implies a gap between both domains that needs to be closed to exploit the full potential of evolutionary computation.

Research on AI-generated text detection has presented a number of approaches to discern human from AI prose, some of which achieving high in-distribution performance. However, real-world applicability has stalled because their outputs are misaligned with the needs of users, such as professors, who are presented with a numeric score that has no attached explanation. We tackle this issue with a novel architecture, TELL, that bakes explainability from the ground-up. While our system still offers a numerical score like other detectors for comparability, TELL takes a fundamentally different approach where we aim to show the user the "tells" by which the model believes a text is AI or human-written, to empower the user to decide who wrote a text using their own judgment and understanding of the context of the writing and its alleged author. We train TELL on a custom SFT dataset of domain-specific authorship annotations, and further refine the system using GRPO with curriculum learning to improve performance. We achieve competitive performance with state-of-the-art detectors (AUROC 0.927) while natively providing annotations that explain the basis for the detector's decision. We further evaluate the quality of our explanations using a dataset of human annotations and report a high (mean 72.3%) win-rate on annotation concreteness, falsifiability, coherence, plausibility and grounding, allowing users to critically think and decide for themselves. Our work thus reframes the problem of AI-generated text detection in a human-centric perspective and paves the way for a new family of detectors that focus on native explainability.

Despite the wide use of explainability techniques to attempt to understand the behavior of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the generated explanations may not always be reliable. An explanation can appear plausible to humans but fail to capture the internal reasoning of a model, particularly when dealing with complex tabular data. This paper studies the trustworthiness of local explainability techniques when applied to complex tabular classification tasks, considering evaluated metrics for three main properties: faithfulness to the model's predictions, robustness to input data variations, and complexity of the explanation itself. A benchmark was performed for Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME), Kernel SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), and Feature Ablation techniques, across 32 datasets and different types of machine learning models. Model performance ranges were analyzed to identify two groups: consensus-correct, which are samples that all models predicted correctly, and consensus-wrong, samples that all models predicted incorrectly. The obtained results demonstrate that that the explanations are not always correlated with a model's predictive performance. Instead, dataset complexity and feature distributions seem to be the main factors affecting explanation quality and reliability.

While Deep Learning (DL) enhances automated electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis, clinical deployment is hindered by class imbalance and the generalization gap. This paper presents HeartBeatAI, a deep learning framework combining domain generalization, multi-scale feature aggregation, and clinical explainability for robust 12-lead ECG classification. Moving beyond image-based paradigms, HeartBeatAI integrates a Squeeze-and-Excitation (SE) ResNet to isolate diagnostic leads alongside a Multi-Layer Concentration Pipeline to capture macro-rhythm and micro-morphological anomalies. To mitigate domain shift, the framework employs MixStyle regularization and Label Smoothing. Rigorous benchmarking across four large-scale datasets using intra-source and Leave-One-Domain-Out (LODO) protocols demonstrates high performance (98% Macro F1-score) under intra-source conditions. However, LODO evaluations reveal significant degradation in detecting rare anomalies, highlighting a persistent challenge in cross-institutional deployment.

Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) are widely recognised as computationally intractable for neural networks, since they induce an exponential search space over the input features. In this work, we take a first step towards scaling exact SHAP computation to larger search spaces by introducing an algorithm that leverages recent advances in neural network verification to compute arbitrarily tight exact lower and upper bounds on SHAP values for neural networks, ultimately recovering the exact SHAP values. We demonstrate that our approach scales to orders of magnitude larger search spaces than state-of-the-art exact methods. This provides an important first step towards exact SHAP computation and establishes a principled cornerstone for evaluating statistical approximation methods on larger search spaces.

Explainability of deep learning algorithms is critical for computer-vision applications with high-stake decisions. Concept bottleneck models (CBM) have recently shown promising performance to provide explainable and accurate predictions for classification problems, based on a bottleneck of high-level concepts. Existing CBM methods rely on a linear aggregation of the concept scores to compute predictions. However, a large number of concepts is often used in this linear approach, which undermines explainability and favors information leakage. In general, the underlying relation between concepts and output logits is not linear. Therefore, we introduce Hoeffding Concept Bottleneck Models (HCBM), which build on the Hoeffding functional decomposition of gradient-boosted trees to provide non-linear and sparse aggregations of concept scores, and generate compact predictions using prime implicants. HCBM are proved to be robust to interconcept leakage, and outperform standard linear CBM in practice, as shown in extensive experiments. Beyond classification, HCBM can be adapted to object detection, and we focus on a challenging case with overhead images to show the high performance of HCBM in these settings.

This paper investigates a unexplored yet impactful vulnerability in AI explainability used in intrusion detection (IDS): multicollinearity-induced instability. Despite extensive reliance on post-hoc explainability tools such as SHAP or LIME, the impact of correlated features on explanation robustness is not evaluated. We introduce a formal theorem stating that multicollinearity inflates attribution variance. This demonstrates that explanations and feature importances are non-identifiable under multicollinearity. A suite of comprehensive experiments validates the theorem on a representative benchmark dataset, UNSW-NB15. Four widely used families of models are evaluated, including linear, tree-based, kernel, and neural, across full and pruned feature sets based on VIF and correlation thresholding. We propose the novel metric of Explanability Fragility Score and two novel methods to mitigate it with variable integration complexity. CAA-Filtering focuses on stabilising explanations by grouping attributions of trained models. SHARP is a novel training-time regularisation framework that penalises attribution instability, enabling controllable and monotonic improvement of explainability stability. The findings support stable predictive performance, using Kendall's τ to quantify instability across bootstrapped explanations. This work has direct implications for the trustworthiness and reproducibility of XAI in security-critical contexts, and motivates incorporating multicollinearity mitigations into the IDS pipelines, providing a set of guidelines for practitioners.

Transformer-based language models such as BERT having 110M+ parameters have revolutionized natural language understanding, yet their internal mechanisms remain largely opaque to researchers and practitioners. Traditional attention-based interpretability methods often emphasize structurally important but semantically weak tokens such as punctuation marks rather than meaningful semantic relationships. This work introduces a lightweight and model-agnostic framework for quantifying token-level representational importance using hidden-state activation strengths at Layer 8 of BERT. The proposed Activation Flow Network (AFN) framework computes Token Activation Strength using the L2 norm of Layer-8 hidden representations, enabling direct ranking of semantically salient tokens. The study further introduces a threshold-based activation bucket formulation that partitions tokens into HIGH-activation and LOW-activation groups using an empirical upper-quartile activation boundary. Experimental observations demonstrate that semantically meaningful content words consistently occupy the HIGH-activation bucket and dominate representational activation shifts, while structurally supportive tokens contribute comparatively less. The results suggest that Layer 8 acts as a critical semantic consolidation zone balancing structural and semantic information processing. By revealing how activation magnitudes concentrate around semantically informative tokens, this work provides an interpretable and computationally efficient alternative to attentioncentric analysis, contributing toward transforming BERT from a "black box" into a more transparent "glass box" model for natural language understanding.

Explainable AI (XAI) methods identify which features are relevant to a model's predictions but often fail to clarify why certain decisions are made. In this work, we present a novel method that integrates causality with argument-based reasoning to explain why models may be making predictions. Our approach first identifies causal relationships among variables using causal discovery methods and then translates these into a Bipolar Argumentation Framework (BAF) to represent supportive and opposing interactions among features. By using semi-stable semantics, we find extensions of features that explain why certain outcomes may have been chosen. We demonstrate our method on two benchmark datasets and compare its results against standard post-hoc explainability approaches.

Prototype-based explanations offer an intuitive, example-based approach to support the interpretability of machine learning black box classifiers but often lack feature-level granularity. We introduce a framework that integrates feature importance at two levels to address this gap. First, for local explanations, we propose \textit{alike parts}: a method that uses feature importance scores to highlight the most relevant, shared feature subsets between a classified instance and its nearest prototype, guiding user attention. Second, we augment the global prototype selection objective function with a feature importance term to actively promote diversity in the feature attributions of the selected prototypes. Experiments on six benchmark datasets show that this augmented selection process maintains or, in some cases, increases the prediction fidelity of the surrogate model, suggesting that feature diversity does not compromise model fidelity.

Concept-based Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) interprets deep learning models using human-understandable visual features (e.g., textures or object parts) by linking internal representations to class predictions, thereby bridging the gap between low-level image data and high-level semantics. A major challenge, however, is the reliance on large sets of labeled images to represent each concept, which limits scalability. In this work, we investigate the use of zero-shot Text-to-Image (T2I) generative models as a source of synthetic concept datasets for concept-based XAI methods. Specifically, we generate concepts using predefined prompts and evaluate their faithfulness to real ones through four complementary analyses: (1) comparing synthetic vs. real concept images via concept representation similarity; (2) evaluating their intra-similarity by comparing pairs of subsets of the same concept with progressively increasing size; (3) evaluating their performance for downstream explanation tasks using relevant class images; (4) evaluating how removing a concept from tested class images affects explanations of generated concepts. While current T2I generative models promise a shortcut to concept-based XAI, our study highlights challenges and raises open questions about the use of synthetic data generated by zero-shot pipelines in model analyses. The resulting dataset is available at https://github.com/DataSciencePolimi/ZeroShot-T2I-Concepts.

We introduce B-cos GNNs, an inherently explainable class of graph neural networks whose predictions decompose exactly into per-node, per-feature contributions via a single input-dependent linear map. B-cos GNNs use linear (sum-based) aggregation and replace non-linear message and update functions with B-cos transforms. This induces meaningful, task-specific weight-input alignment that is directly accessible through the model's dynamic linearity. Instance-level explanations follow from a single forward and backward pass, requiring no auxiliary explainer, modified learning objective, or perturbation procedure. Instantiated as a GIN, our approach trades small losses in predictive accuracy for state-of-the-art explainability across diverse synthetic and real-world benchmarks, producing explanations orders of magnitude faster than post-hoc baselines.

The functional ANOVA, or Hoeffding decomposition, provides a principled framework for interpretability by decomposing a model prediction into main effects and higher-order interactions. For independent inputs, this classical decomposition is explicit. It is closely connected to SHAP values, generalized additive models, and orthogonal polynomial expansions, and therefore constitutes a fundamental tool for additive explainability. In the more general and realistic dependent setting, however, obtaining a tractable representation and estimating the decomposition from data remain challenging. In this work, we address this problem for continuous inputs. By combining Hilbert space methods with the generalized functional ANOVA, we build an explicit decomposition Riesz Basis allowing to easily compute the decomposition. Our formulation recovers the classical independent case and its associated orthogonal decomposition. Building on this representation, we propose a simple but mighty algorithm to estimate the decomposition from a data sample in a model-agnostic setting and we compare it empirically with several state-of-the-art explanation methods, demonstrating the power of the approach.

Counterfactual explanations (CFEs) provide actionable recourse, but most methods assume a static framework with fixed data and a trained classifier. This assumption breaks in evolving data environments, such as data streams, where online models are repeatedly updated under concept drift. We identify CFE maintenance in this setting as a previously overlooked problem: explanations that are valid when generated may silently become invalid as the model evolves, including robust CFEs, which are not designed for continuous drift. We propose a lightweight, model-agnostic update scheme that repairs existing CFEs using local sampling to estimate validity and plausibility directions while preserving proximity to the original instance. Experiments on synthetic drifting streams show that initially created CFEs rapidly lose validity, whereas maintained CFEs preserve validity and local plausibility at a lower cost than repeated regeneration.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) policies translate language and visual inputs into robot actions, where their hidden representations directly shape closed-loop behavior. However, mechanistic interpretability tools from language and vision-language models do not transfer cleanly to VLAs: outputs are robot actions rather than human-readable tokens, and interventions can only be tested via expensive closed-loop rollouts. We propose an event-grounded interpretability pipeline that anchors SAE feature analysis to behavioral events rather than text contexts. End-effector keyframes are clustered within each task using visual, state, and temporal cues, linking SAE features to behaviorally salient events and, via optional VLM annotations, to semantic context. To our knowledge, our pipeline is among the first to ground SAE-based VLA analysis in closed-loop behavioral events. Across two simulation architectures and a real-robot study, event-grounded ranking yields the strongest causal effects on OpenVLA and transfers to the continuous action chunks of $π_{0.5}$. SAE is a sparse but imperfect intervention basis: usability varies with architecture and intervention site, and aggressive intervention reveals safety and interpretability limits. Overall, event-grounded SAE analysis emerges as a practical starting point for behavior-anchored VLA interpretability, motivating future work on SAE features beyond action-aligned coordinates, finer-grained closed-loop evaluation, and safe interventions for high-stakes VLA deployments. Code is available at \url{https://github.com/xc-j/Event-SAE}.

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.