Explainability

Computer vision models have become highly effective for medical applications, yet their black-box nature continues to undermine clinician trust. In clinical workflows, chest X-ray classifiers are increasingly paired with Vision-Language Models (VLMs) to generate natural-language explanations. However, these systems add linguistic fluency without addressing the underlying opacity of the visual model. With the emergence of Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs), whose spline-based components provide inherently interpretable functional units, we investigate whether this architectural transparency can be leveraged to produce more trustworthy textual explanations. We introduce KANEx, the first ever framework that leverages the symbolic transparency of KANs to ground VLM reasoning. This interpretability also made it possible to design KAN-Map, a novel heatmap generation method derived directly from KAN models rather than gradient approximations. We feed these grounded contexts into downstream VLMs for enhanced explainability. Benchmarked on the MIMIC-CXR dataset, we demonstrate that KAN-based architectures with ResNet/ViT baselines demonstrate improved semantic similarity while producing significantly more faithful saliency maps. KAN architectures improve visual localization and downstream reasoning quality by 10%. Our findings suggest that grounding linguistic explanations and visual attributions in mathematically interpretable units is a necessary step toward trustworthy medical AI.

Background: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to automate code review, but the reasoning behind their decisions remains hard to understand. Developers struggle to assess the validity of LLM-generated reviews, making it difficult to gauge how much trust to place in them. The role of Explainable AI (XAI) in code review and its impact on trust remain underexplored. Objective: We study the influence of XAI on developer trust in AI-assisted code reviews. Method: We conducted a within-subjects user study with 34 participants, comparing three LLM-based code review systems with varying levels of XAI support: Condition A (detailed explanation and review feedback), Condition B (review feedback only), and Condition C (no explanations). Participants reviewed real-world code change requests alongside the AI-generated reviews. We measured trust perceptions, agreement with the AI recommendation, the reasoning given for each decision, and the time taken. Results: The level of explanation significantly influences both trust and agreement with AI recommendations, but in different ways. Full explanations (A) yield the highest perceived trust (M = 3.99/5) but not the highest agreement, whereas moderate explanations (B) achieve the highest agreement (89.22%). This could suggest that more explanation prompts developers to question AI recommendations more frequently. No explanations (C) results in the lowest trust and agreement. Explanation level did not significantly affect review time. The most commonly cited reasons for decisions were code readability and correctness. Conclusion: Incorporating XAI into code review significantly changes trust perceptions and agreement with AI recommendations. These results inform the design and evaluation of trustworthy AI-based code review systems, as well as studies on the human factors of AI-assisted software development.

As system complexity has vastly increased, it has become significantly more challenging for a single person or a team to fully understand all aspects of an entire system. Particularly, this holds when considering all the different stages of a system's development life cycle, such as, e.g., design or maintenance. But especially for safety-critical systems it is essential that the final design can be trusted. Because of this, explainability is becoming an important requirement for modern systems. In this paper, we aim to achieve this goal by utilizing Behavior-Driven Development (BDD), where the expected system behavior is given in the form of structured scenarios. These scenarios give a sequence of actions for each functionality, and by this can be directly translated into explanations. We introduce this method of deriving explanations based on the specification as Behavior-Driven Explainability (BDX). While applicable at any development stage or abstraction level, a case study for the explanation of exceptions in a RISC-V processor shows the support this concept adds during system design.

We present MiSS, a black-box, query-based framework for explaining 3D point cloud classifiers through perturbation-relative sufficiency reasoning. MiSS treats a superpoint partition as an interpretable abstraction layer and asks whether the original prediction can be certified from a minimal coalition of geometric regions under a specified perturbation distribution. Unlike abductive explainers that require Boolean feature spaces or white-box logical encodings of the predictor, MiSS separates candidate proposal from verification: a weighted MaxSAT procedure proposes coalitions using a heuristic adaptive cardinality floor, certified exact-size fallback, a safely tightened upper bound, blocking clauses, and a surrogate acquisition heuristic learned from previous oracle evaluations, while a blackbox statistical oracle decides sufficiency from prediction queries. The system returns a statistically verified sufficient coalition as a binary attribution, with minimum cardinality guaranteed when certified search completes. Experiments on ModelNet40 and ShapeNet with PointNet and PointMLP classifiers show higher precision and coverage than rule-based baselines in most settings, with lower explanation time than exhaustive search.

Explainable AI (XAI) is used to assess whether artificial intelligence models rely on meaningful patterns, yet explanations that appear plausible for individual predictions may systematically misrepresent model behavior. This is particularly problematic in medicine, where models may rely on irrelevant signal characteristics rather than disease-specific patterns without being recognizable. We address this challenge using electrocardiogram (ECG) data, for which clinical guidelines provide explicit knowledge about diagnostically relevant signal regions. We introduce a global, guideline-grounded framework that aggregates explanations across heartbeats to evaluate them against clinically defined regions of interest. Using four binary classifiers trained on PTB-XL, we assess 13 gradient-based methods across two categories of patterns: low-amplitude segments and high-amplitude QRS morphology. Our results reveal a systematic failure of methods transferred from computer vision. Their explanations often follow signal amplitude rather than clinical relevance, with mean Spearman correlations up to 0.69, leading them to overlook diagnostically decisive low-amplitude regions. For ischemia, LRP-$ε$ assigns only 4.6% of relevance to the ST segment, compared with 63.8% for LRP-SIGN. Nine of 13 methods fall below chance for at least one condition, indicating inconsistent reliability across patterns. These findings show that global, domain-grounded evaluation can uncover systematic explanation failures not obvious from sample-level heatmaps.

Recent work in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) increasingly treats AI models as design materials that have distinctive computational properties to shape design artifacts. Artists learn to work with the model "at play" to explore their emerging properties. The aim of explainability, in this view, is to make visible a crafting and hacking space to enable sustained creative practices with AI. In this chapter, we propose material explainability as a range of activities and artifacts that transform AI models into accessible and inclusive design materials in the workspace of artists, designers, and makers. We present a case study of building a repository of resources to enable artistic explorations of neural audio models in New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME) design. Reflecting on our community-building journey and the making of a collection of musical interface designs with a group of artists, we raise three recommendations on enabling the exploration of AI as materials in artistic practices to inspire future XAI design for artists.

Deep neural networks have been widely used in many applications (e.g., computer vision and natural language processing); however, understanding their explainability remains a challenging task. Recently, substantial research has been devoted to improving the explainability of deep neural networks, with most of this work focusing on the regression framework. In this paper, we instead focus on the binary classification framework and adopt a variable-importance framework combined with the idea of lazy training to propose an efficient algorithm for identifying important features. From a theoretical perspective, our method relies on only a minimal set of assumptions and achieves well-controlled error rates. The validity of the proposed method and algorithm is examined through extensive simulation studies and real-data applications.

To effectively integrate AI into high-stakes, critical environments such as healthcare, autonomous driving, and aviation--and to advance toward higher levels of automation and seamless human-AI collaboration--building trust in AI-driven solutions is essential. Trust, in turn, is closely linked to the explainability of AI systems. The rapid advancements in AI across various domains have underscored the challenges of establishing trust, raising increasing interest in AI explainability even more when applied to deep learning. In this context, the present work aims to explore the application of explainability techniques to Reinforcement Learning (RL) algorithms, specifically within the safety-critical domain of Air Traffic Control (ATC). Using a simplified ATC environment as an initial testbed, an intelligent agent is trained with a reinforcement learning algorithm to make decisions on alternative flight routes that avoid no-fly zones. As a preliminary explainability approach, a saliency map is employed, providing insights into the input features that most significantly influence the agent's decision-making process.

Explainable AI (XAI) in creative practice can be less about technocentric explanation and more about enabling artists to inspect modify and debug models as part of making Yet largescale texttoimage diffusion systems are typically presented as opaque endtoend tools limiting this kind of material engagement We argue that even large models can function as creative materials when their internal structure is made visible and manipulable To support this we propose a handson approach to explainability centred on experimentation and intervention We instantiate this approach with a model bending and an interactive (inspection) interface integrated into ComfyUIs nodebased workflow including interactive layer selection and intervention controls Through qualitative and quantitative analysis of bending interventions in Stable Diffusion 15 we show how manipulating specific components of a diffusion pipeline produces relatively consistent families of visual effects allowing artists to build practical layerlevel intuition about how different parts of the model shape generated images

Instance-level explanations aim to reveal the rationale behind a model's decisions for a specific graph. Previous methods explain graph neural networks (GNNs) by selecting important edges to induce subgraphs, where edge importance is assessed by perturbing each edge and observing changes in the model predictions. However, they often neglect the synergistic effects among edges, which are crucial for accurately characterizing edge importance. To address this issue, we propose SeeExplainer, a parameter-free explainer to interpret GNNs. Specifically, we first introduce a granular-ball graph refinement mechanism that decomposes a graph into several disjoint granular-balls with no fixed size, and utilize them as nodes to construct a structural graph. This process can better capture the synergistic effects among edges. Then, we perturb nodes and edges in the structural graph to generate explanatory subgraphs based on their respective contributions. Experiments on several graph classification datasets of different networks show that SeeExplainer outperforms state-of-the-art baselines.

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

Automated detection of vision impairing retina-based ocular conditions from fundus images is important for early screening, timely referral and reducing dependency on specialist-only assessment, for which neural network-based deep learning (DL) models have been widely utilized. However, explainability of the DL frameworks remains a major bottleneck for clinical adoption, particularly when model decisions are not linked to retinal regions that are clinically meaningful. To address this issue, this study presents CounterFundus, a novel CycleGAN-driven counterfactual explainability framework, integrating EfficientNet-B5-based retinal disease detection with visually interpretable disease-to-normal fundus image translation. For each pathological image, the counterfactual yielded by the CycleGAN generator represents an estimated healthy counterpart and the resultant difference map is utilized to localize disease-associated retinal changes. Unlike conventional post-hoc saliency methods, CounterFundus provides counterfactual explanations through visually plausible disease-to-normal retinal translation. Thereafter, to quantify the spatial agreement between counterfactual difference maps and classifier saliency, the Counterfactual-Classifier Alignment Score (CCAS) is introduced, embedding Spearman correlation, binary IoU and pointing accuracy into a single assessment protocol. To this end, EigenCAM-aligned evaluation demonstrates that the generated counterfactual explanations remain spatially consistent with classifier-relevant retinal evidence across all CCAS dimensions. Along with that, ablation studies further confirm that CCAS-filtered counterfactual augmentation improves the downstream classification performance in fundus images, establishing CounterFundus as a clinically-grounded, explainable artificially intelligence (XAI) framework for retinal disease detection.

Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly integrated into optical network automation frameworks to support tasks such as failure management, performance monitoring and resource allocation. In these environments, ML-driven predictions may be directly coupled with control-plane actions where incorrect decisions can immediately impact service quality, resource efficiency, and network stability. As automation levels increase, ensuring the reliability of individual decisions at deployment time becomes a critical requirement. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques have emerged to improve transparency by highlighting the factors influencing ML predictions. In addition to identifying influential features, they provide insights into the underlying reasoning process of the model, revealing how different input variables contribute to the final outcome and how feature interactions shape the decision boundary. In this work, we introduce explanation-based runtime verification, an approach that exploits model explanations to assess the soundness of individual ML decisions before they are executed in the network control loop. The proposed approach evaluates explanation coherence and physics grounding consistency at runtime, enabling the system to defer or reject decisions flagged as uncertain. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach on a representative use case of lightpath quality of transmission classification. Experimental results show that explanation-based verification can intercept a significant fraction of erroneous decisions while preserving high automation rate.

Detecting media bias automatically is difficult because biased framing is often subtle, yet in domains such as news analysis, accurate predictions alone are insufficient without explanations that reflect the model's underlying reasoning. We present a multi-dimensional evaluation of explainability in encoder-based media bias detection using the Bias Annotations By Experts (BABE) dataset. Specifically, we study BERT and RoBERTa as classifiers (base and large variants) along three complementary axes: predictive performance, explanation plausibility (token-level alignment with expert rationales), and mechanistic faithfulness (whether compact sets of attention heads recover predictive signal under counterfactual rationale masking). To induce variation in plausibility, we additionally investigate attention-supervised finetuning, which incorporates expert rationale annotations as an auxiliary training signal. Attention supervision serves as an intervention on attribution plausibility, while the effectiveness of attribution methods varies substantially across architectures. Circuit analysis further reveals substantial variation in mechanistic recoverability across architectures, suggesting that model scale alone does not determine circuit compressibility. Taken together, our findings suggest that predictive performance, attribution plausibility, and mechanistic faithfulness characterize different aspects of model behavior and should be evaluated separately when studying explainability in media bias detection.

Validating Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods in medical imaging requires ground-truth data with known locations of informative features. However, current approaches rely on expert annotations, which are prone to labeling errors, or on hand-crafted artificial perturbations superimposed onto healthy images to mimic lesions or malignant features, which lack clinical realism. We present Local Label-Informed Feature Transfer (LLIFT), a framework for generating semi-synthetic brain magnetic resonance images with realistic lesions placed in user-controlled regions, which does not require pixel-level lesion annotations during training. We implement LLIFT with two generative paradigms: LLIFT-GAN, a custom GAN that learns pathological features from binary class labels alone, and LLIFT-DM, a diffusion-based inpainting pipeline conditioned on bounding-box masks via ControlNet. Both approaches are evaluated on brain magnetic resonance imaging data derived from the Human Connectome Project. In evaluations, both achieve Fréchet Inception Distance scores, with respect to the real pathological distribution, that are comparable to the inter-class reference between healthy and pathological images in the given dataset. Furthermore, qualitative inspection confirms the realism of lesion structures. The resulting benchmark datasets provide spatially controlled ground truth data for evaluating XAI methods in medical imaging.

This paper proposes ConceptCF, a method for counterfactual generation that operates on human-interpretable concepts. In high-stakes domains such as healthcare and predictive maintenance, artificial intelligence models can increase efficiency and safety. Explainability is key to ensure these models rely on causal relationships rather than spurious correlations. Counterfactual explanations identify minimal modifications that would change a model's predictions. Existing methods for time series operate on individual points or subsequences without ensuring interpretability of the mutations. ConceptCF instead modifies meaningful concepts. As a result we can provide explanations in terms of these concepts, for example ``the model's prediction would be Sit' instead of Walk' if you increase the scale of the movement''. In this paper, the concepts are constructed through time series decomposition, resulting in concepts such as scale, and frequency bands. Counterfactuals are generated using a genetic algorithm that optimizes the concept mutations. Evaluation against five state-of-the-art approaches demonstrates that ConceptCF consistently achieves top-tier performance across validity, confidence, proximity, sparsity and plausibility metrics.

Predictive process monitoring supports the optimization and control of operational business processes by forecasting the future state or outcome of ongoing cases. While deep neural networks have achieved strong performance for these tasks by modeling sequential dependencies in event logs, their black-box nature limits trust and practical adoption. Feature attribution methods are often used to address this, but applying them directly poses a dilemma: event-level attributions impose high computational complexity for long traces, while explanations based on aggregated trace representations often fail to capture the underlying control-flow dynamics. To address this issue, we propose a local post-hoc explainability method for deep neural networks in outcome prediction. The method relies on a control-flow-aware segmentation algorithm that partitions a trace into meaningful segments and supports the computation of segment-level SHAP explanations. This makes it possible to identify which parts of a trace influence a prediction and which change points steer the case toward the predicted outcome. We assess the proposed segmentation method on a synthetic dataset with known process logic, where meaningful change points can be explicitly verified, and we demonstrate its usefulness on real-world event logs from a loan application process and an administrative process of a Dutch municipality.

Money mule accounts are critical facilitators of financial fraud, yet detecting them at scale remains challenging due to the heterogeneous nature of transactional and behavioural data. We present an end-to-end pipeline for customer-level mule detection comprising three stages: (1) a LightGBM classifier trained on 280 engineered features spanning transaction patterns, account demographics, network topology, and temporal behaviour; (2) a TreeSHAP attribution layer that decomposes each prediction into feature contributions; and (3) a large language model (LLM) module that converts SHAP attributions into analyst-facing natural-language narratives. We evaluate across three open-weight LLM families and assess explanation quality through analyst feedback. In a live production deployment, the system achieves a yield rate of 89%, up from 61% under the incumbent rule-based system, with monthly alert volume expanding from 211 to 302, reflecting broader true-positive coverage rather than increased noise. This corresponds to a 60% incremental adverse detection beyond existing review workflows, substantially outperforming the rule-based approach. Qualitative feedback from analysts indicates that LLM-generated narratives reduce cognitive load during alert triage. We further discuss implications of deploying LLM-augmented explainability in regulated financial environments.

Transformer-based large language models (LLMs) continue to achieve state-of-the-art performance across various natural language processing tasks. However, their subpar performance on seemingly elementary problems, such as basic arithmetic, raises concerns about model reliability, safety, and ethical deployment. In this study, we demonstrate that the performance of a vanilla Transformer model trained on integer arithmetic tasks can be improved using methods effective for human learners. We begin by decomposing the arithmetic task into well-defined subtasks and conducting loss convergence order analysis together with ablation studies for each subtask. Our findings reveal that LLMs exhibit learning patterns similar to those of human learners, with a faster learning speed for simpler subtasks compared to more complex ones. In addition, we successfully improved the accuracy of LLMs by applying problem-solving strategies and cognitive empowerment methods shown to enhance the performance of human learners. This suggests that transformer-based LLMs may share cognitive processes with human learners in arithmetic. Lastly, we provide a comprehensive demonstration of our method's effectiveness, including significant accuracy improvement experiments, visualization verification, and explanation-based analysis to illuminate the intricacies of LLMs in arithmetic learning. In general, this work explores the potential similarities between transformer-based LLMs and human learners, supported by explainable AI (XAI) verifications, ultimately fostering trust in LLMs for critical and high-stakes applications.

This position paper argues that claims about explanation stability are scientifically invalid without cross method validation. Just as statistical significance requires the test statistic to be specified, stability should either be evaluated across multiple attribution paradigms or explicitly scoped to the computational objective of a single method. In controlled chest X ray experiments, DenseNet201, ResNet50V2, and InceptionV3 achieved AUC values above 99%, yet their stability rankings reversed across attribution methods. LayerCAM ranked InceptionV3 as the most stable model, with an IoU of 0.777, whereas GradCAM++ favored DenseNet201 and reduced InceptionV3 stability score by 17.3%. These findings demonstrate that explanation stability is an emergent property of the model method pair rather than an intrinsic characteristic of the model alone. We therefore argue that explanation based claims should be validated across multiple attribution methods and that regulatory submissions should explicitly specify the attribution operators used to avoid creating illusory safety assurances.

Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate natural language explanations that rationalize their own decisions, a phenomenon commonly referred to as self-explanations. Such explanations have emerged as a promising direction for explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), particularly for interpreting LLM behavior. However, while self-explanations often appear plausible, whether they faithfully reflect a model's underlying reasoning process remains an open question. In this opinion paper, we argue that self-explanations can be highly plausible, questionably faithful, and yet highly actionable. From a traditional XAI perspective, we identify the limitations of standard evaluation protocols for LLM-generated self-explanations and propose practical guidelines for assessing their plausibility and faithfulness. Moreover, we argue that evaluation should extend beyond these criteria to actionability, highlighting applications of LLM rationalization capabilities that support informed decision-making and appropriate action across diverse stakeholders.

Explainable AI (XAI) for time series has seen significant algorithmic growth, but its utility in providing measurable performance gains for downstream tasks remains under-explored. This paper bridges this gap by introducing drXAI, a novel methodology that repurposes XAI attribution methods for effective data reduction in Time Series Classification (TSC). The core challenge in modern TSC is scalability; state-of-the-art models, such as Transformers, exhibit quadratic complexity relative to sequence length and linear complexity relative to the number of channels. This renders them computationally prohibitive for massive datasets. drXAI addresses this by using a fast, GPU-accelerated classifier (Hydra) to generate local attributions. We aggregate these into global feature importance scores and employ an automated elbow-cut heuristic to select the most salient features without requiring manual thresholds. We evaluate our approach on both synthetic and real-world univariate and multivariate datasets. On synthetic benchmarks, drXAI successfully recovers ground-truth features where traditional baselines fail. On real-world data, drXAI achieves between 80% and 90% data reduction while maintaining classification accuracy comparable to models trained on the full dataset. Most importantly, we show that drXAI allows resource-intensive models like ConvTran to scale to datasets that were previously inaccessible due to memory constraints. Our results show the benefits of using XAI not just for interpretability, but as a robust tool for feature selection and scalability in time series analysis. All our code and data are openly available.

Perturbation-based xAI methods are widely used to analyze the behavior and predictions of deep learning models. By altering input regions and measuring the resulting changes in class probabilities with respect to the original image, they assign relevance scores and generate heatmaps that reflect each region's contribution to the prediction. Despite their apparent simplicity, however, perturbation-based methods are sensitive to parameter choices. In this work, we focus on two key parameters of the perturbation pipeline, namely the patch geometry, including the size and shape of the perturbed regions, and the perturbation type, defined by the replacement scheme. Grounded in the use case of flood detection from Synthetic Aperture Radar imagery, we conduct a comprehensive investigation of how relevance estimation changes under different perturbation settings. Beyond visual inspection of the resulting relevance maps, we evaluate their consistency across perturbation strategies and their faithfulness to the model's reasoning. We demonstrate how different perturbation choices can steer the resulting relevance maps, yielding ambiguous and even contradictory explanations. Our findings emphasize the importance of methodological settings in perturbation-based xAI. They underscore the need to carefully inspect and evaluate perturbation choices and to treat them as an integral part when interpreting explanations, ensuring a robust understanding of both the explanations and model predictions.

In this paper, we present a comprehensive framework for assessing the explainability of various XAI methods, such as LIME and SHAP, across multiple datasets and machine learning models, with the ultimate goal of creating a unified multidimensional explainability score. Our methodology focuses on three key aspects of explainability: fidelity, simplicity, and stability. We leverage benchmarking experiments to systematically evaluate these aspects and use the insights gained to construct an offline knowledge base. This knowledge base captures the explainability scores for each registered model and serves as a valuable resource for context-dependent evaluation of explainability. By analyzing the complementary characteristics and metadata of AI models, datasets, and XAI methods, the knowledge base will enable the estimation of explainability scores for previously unseen datasets and models. Properties like fidelity, simplicity, and stability may vary significantly based on the dataset, underlying model, and domain expertise of the end user. We demonstrate our framework by applying it to three open-source datasets, discussing the implications of the obtained results in relation to the characteristics of the datasets. Our work contributes to the growing field of XAI by providing a robust and versatile tool for evaluating and comparing the explainability of various XAI methods, ultimately supporting the development of more transparent and trustworthy AI systems.

Feature-attribution methods are central to explainable artificial intelligence. Their assumptions are expressed in several mathematical languages: cooperative-game values, path integrals, gradient operators, perturbation distributions, and backpropagation rules. This survey proposes a common framework for local additive feature attribution. It organizes Shapley, path-based, gradient/backpropagation, perturbation, and CAM-style methods around five specification choices: value function, reference, path, perturbation distribution, and conservation rule. It then compares these methods through an axiom-by-method matrix and links common failure modes, including baseline sensitivity, off-manifold perturbations, sanity-check failures, adversarial manipulation, and method disagreement, to the assumptions that produce them. Finally, the survey proposes a ten-item reporting checklist for studies that use local additive attributions. The central message is that attribution results are meaningful only relative to the mathematical assumptions under which they are defined, and that those assumptions should be reported.

Explainable Reinforcement Learning (XRL) seeks to make Reinforcement Learning (RL) policies more transparent and interpretable, a key requirement in safety-critical and human-centric scenarios. However, it is mostly based on user studies, thus targeting the needs of a specific audience and lacking shared evaluation metrics. On the other hand, logic-based approaches within eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) provide compact, human-readable abstractions of decision-making. However, the systematic quantification of the explainability degree of logical representations remains an open problem. This work aims to advance the state of the art in XRL by introducing objective and planning-oriented metrics for policy explainability in RL settings. At the same time, it contributes to the field of logic for XAI by providing a principled way to quantify the explainability of logical rules, moving beyond common-sense assessments and simple propositional fragments. We employ Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) to extract symbolic representations of RL policies and define a novel set of explainability metrics, including activation rate, feature coverage, syntactic distance and semantic distance. These metrics quantify alignment between symbolic rules and agent behavior, the role of features in decision-making, and the evolution of policies during training and across agents in single and multi-agent RL. Experiments across different RL domains show that the proposed metrics highlight action-specific learning dynamics beyond global return, provide fine-grained insights into domain features beyond classical approaches for global feature importance estimation, and uncover coordination, specialization, and adaptation patterns in MARL. Moreover, they provide crucial insights for the transfer and generalization of action-specific policies.

The banking sector increasingly relies on automated systems to monitor electronic transactions for signs of fraud, yet conventional rule-based approaches struggle with high false-positive rates and offer no justification for their outputs, limiting their utility for compliance teams. This paper introduces an Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) framework tailored for banking transaction anomaly detection within internal audit workflows. An Isolation Forest (iForest) model performs unsupervised anomaly scoring, while a SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) layer provides transaction-level, feature-attributed explanations grounded in cooperative game theory [8]. A lightweight Streamlit dashboard renders these outputs in a form accessible to audit professionals without machine learning expertise. Evaluation on a synthetic banking dataset yields 0.91 precision and 0.88 recall, outperforming three unsupervised baselines. Expert feedback confirms that feature-level explanations measurably improve auditor confidence and decision quality. The framework advances the practical deployment of accountable, transparent AI in regulated financial environments.

Explainability has emerged as a critical requirement for AI-based systems, particularly in safety-critical and regulated domains. Although prior research has proposed frameworks, patterns, and user-centered approaches to support explainability, there is limited empirical understanding of how existing Requirements Engineering (RE) practices support explainability requirements across the RE lifecycle, especially in an industrial context. This paper reports early findings from an ongoing industry-based study investigating how explainability requirements are elicited, specified, and validated using established RE techniques. We conducted a multi-phase qualitative study with eight practitioners at Daimler Truck, employing think-aloud protocols and moderated group discussions across requirements elicitation, specification, and validation steps. Our preliminary analysis reveals recurring challenges across all steps, including conceptual ambiguity during elicitation, limited testability and expressiveness during specification, and fragmented validation due to vague criteria and regulatory uncertainty. These findings indicate that current RE practices provide limited support to systematically address explainability requirements. The paper contributes empirical insights into step-specific and cross-cutting challenges and outlines a research vision toward developing an empirically grounded RE framework for explainable AI-based systems.

Explainable machine learning (XML) pipelines applied to composite mental health outcomes can produce apparently-robust, cross-population-stable risk hierarchies that are largely artefacts of how the outcome was constructed. We demonstrate this using an ElasticNet pipeline applied to 886 medical students at the University of Lausanne (primary cohort, 2022), validated across 2,580 longitudinal observations at three time points and 701 non-medical students from eight faculties; all three datasets share identical instruments. The pipeline produces a hierarchy in which trait anxiety and health satisfaction dominate wherever the outcome is measured, with Kendall $τ= 1.0$ for the top-two positions across all five evaluation sets and consistent transfer performance ($R^2$: 0.41-0.49). Two residualization experiments, which isolate shared variance between correlated variables via regression, reveal the mechanism: when trait anxiety (STAI-T) is residualized against the co-included depression subscale (CES-D, $r = 0.72$), model $R^2$ drops from 0.41 to 0.16 and STAI-T falls from rank 1 to rank 6; when burnout subscales are residualized against CES-D, $R^2$ collapses to 0.016. Prediction intervals average 35.4 units on a 0-100 scale (2.4 outcome standard deviations), independently ruling out individual-level deployment. The residualization protocol is the paper's transferable contribution: any XAI study combining correlated predictor and outcome constructs should apply this check before interpreting apparent stability as a finding.

Vision Transformers (ViTs) are difficult to interpret because current methods of relevance propagation and attention flow do not fully consider some key architectural features, such as the uneven importance of attention heads and residual connections. Prior approaches typically assume uniform importance across attention heads; furthermore, they model skip connections as identity paths, leading to inaccurate relevance attribution. To address these issues, we introduce GradSkip, a novel relevance propagation method for ViTs based on adaptive head weighting and skip-aware propagation. GradSkip models the different importance of the attention heads and dynamically distributes relevance between the attention and residual paths. Experiments on ImageNet1K and BloodMNIST demonstrate a state-of-the-art faithfulness of GradSkip while requiring over 14 times fewer GFLOPs than the best-performing existing approaches. Additional evaluations using transformer-based segmentation confirm improved localization and alignment with ground-truth regions.

Concept-based explainable artificial intelligence (AI) can make model reasoning more human-understandable, but concept-level outputs are not automatically trustworthy. We introduce ConceptSMILE, a model-agnostic perturbation-based auditing framework for evaluating the reliability of concept-based explanations. Rather than replacing SMILE, ConceptSMILE extends its perturbation-based logic from feature- or region-level attribution to the auditing of human-understandable concept explanations. The framework perturbs input regions, measures concept-response shifts, applies locality weighting, and fits an XGBoost surrogate to approximate local concept behaviour. Reliability is assessed through attribution accuracy, surrogate fidelity, faithfulness, stability, and consistency. We evaluate ConceptSMILE on retinal fundus images by comparing MedSAM-derived visual concepts with VLM-based semantic concepts. Results show that reliability varies across concepts and pathways: MedSAM achieves stronger spatial attribution and the highest surrogate fidelity ($R^2 = 0.8503$, $R_w^2 = 0.8465$), while the VLM pathway shows stronger vessel faithfulness and stronger stability under selected artefact conditions. ConceptSMILE provides an independent audit layer for evaluating the trustworthiness of concept-based XAI.

Pre-demolition assessment, the regulated audit process at the heart of urban mining, is an information process in which AI support must serve qualified auditors who remain accountable for the decisions taken. The relevant unit of value is not prediction accuracy alone, but the defensibility of the supported decisions: their legibility, plausibility, sourcing, and contestability. Explainable AI techniques and domain knowledge graphs each address parts of this requirement, and existing taxonomies have catalogued their integration. The literature is descriptively rich but structurally under-specified: what remains less developed is a structural account of why specific integrations produce artefacts neither resource can provide alone. This paper offers a complementarity-theoretic interpretation grounded in the IS resource-based tradition. We propose four consolidated KG-XAI integration modes (Lifting, Constraining, Typing, and Revising), each defined as a typed operation over XAI artefacts and knowledge-graph substrate structures. Each mode unlocks a distinct property of defensibility and contributes to the kind of regulatory artefact pre-demolition assessment demands. A fire-door example from the urban-mining process illustrates the modes using the W3C Linked Building Data stack and valuation extensions.

Explaining machine-learning models is increasingly important for decision-making and consumer trust, yet it is widely believed to come at a cost: existing Explainable AI (XAI) methods suffer from a persistent accuracy-explainability trade-off. We argue that this trade-off is not fundamental, but an artifact of treating explanation and prediction as separate objectives; when properly coupled, they become complementary, so that equipping a model to explain itself improves, rather than degrades, its accuracy. We introduce the Rashomon Explanation paradigm, which builds a set of faithful, prediction-guiding explanations rather than a single one, and prove that this set is generally non-empty and that explanation fidelity bounds the performance of the models it guides. To explore this set, we propose RashomonLLM, an Explanation-Prediction-Reflection agentic workflow that generates explanations in natural language by iteratively aligning them with predictions, and we prove it converges and recovers the full set. Across customer-churn classification, clinical survival regression, and industrial click-through prediction on large-scale live-streaming logs, RashomonLLM significantly outperforms state-of-the-art prediction and XAI baselines on both accuracy and explanation quality, with gains driven by explanation fidelity and robust to distribution shifts, temporal splits, and seeds. Our framework thus advances business performance while laying the groundwork for consumer trust.

As the accuracy of speech deepfake detection improves with the use of self-supervised representations such as wav2vec 2.0 and HuBERT, understanding why the speech is classified as bona fide or deepfake remains an open challenge. In pursuit of more trustworthy and interpretable artificial intelligence, we introduce a phoneme-level analysis framework that connects model predictions to measurable phonetic units. Our post-hoc explainability method is generally applicable to a variety of speech deepfake detection systems based on convolutional neural networks since it leverages Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping in conjunction with speech recognition to generate saliency maps aligned with phonemes and pauses. This pipeline reveals statistically significant attack- and speaker-dependent phonetic cues associated with spoofed speech in terms that humans can understand. Experiments using ASVspoof 5 show comparable detection performance to similar architectures while providing linguistic interpretations across speakers and spoofing conditions.

We present a Procrustes-conditioned Joint End-to-end Top-K Sparse Autoencoder (SAE) for extracting cross-seed universal features from independently trained BERT models. Cross-seed feature universality is a fundamental challenge in mechanistic interpretability: because dictionary learning is non-convex, independently trained networks learn misaligned feature spaces, so apparently identical features may differ by random initialization. We address this by computing an orthogonal Procrustes rotation between seeds' activation spaces before joint SAE training, combining Top-K sparsity, end-to-end downstream optimization, and an auxiliary dead-feature revival loss based on previous SAE literature. Evaluating on five independent seed pairs (ten BERT models) across three benchmark datasets (SST-2, Stanford Politeness, TweetEval Emotion), our full pipeline produces more universal features (Pearson r $\geq$ 0.70 across seeds) than post-hoc alignment baselines on all three datasets. A minimal qualitative analysis confirms that high-universality features encode interpretable sociolinguistic patterns.

This article offers a comprehensive overview of mechanistic interpretability, an emerging field that seeks to reverse-engineer the internal algorithms of modern neural networks. While traditional explainable AI methods often stop at surface-level input-output correlations, this approach directly addresses the opaque "black box" nature of machine learning models, which is essential for ensuring safety and auditability in high-stakes deployments. The paper provides a detailed examination of Transformer circuit analysis, exploring how internal components like the residual stream, attention mechanisms, and induction heads drive complex tasks and in-context learning. It subsequently tackles the core challenge of superposition and polysemanticity, demonstrating how tools like Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) and transcoders can decompose tangled network activations into distinct, human-interpretable features. Furthermore, the paper explores methods for actively controlling and modifying model behavior through steering vectors and causal interventions. Finally, it connects these mechanistic insights with neurosymbolic AI frameworks designed to translate neural representations into explicit, executable logical rules.

Deepfake (DF) technology poses a significant threat to information integrity, driving the need for robust detection methods. Most DF detectors only consider predicting a binary label for whether the input is real or fake, lacking the justification required for real-world applications like legal proceedings. Explainable DF Detection has emerged to address this limitation, but existing techniques frequently fall short by either relying on human annotations for precise artifact localization or generating superficially plausible textual explanations without grounding. This work investigates the use of post-hoc explainable AI (XAI) to analyze the decision-making process of state-of-the-art black-box DF detectors. Specifically, we employ Encoding-Decoding Direction Pairs (EDDP), a technique suitable for uncovering the concept space of DF detectors (their semantic vocabulary) as well as the mechanism for writing and reading concept information to and from internal representations. Our analysis reveals previously hidden real and fake features learned implicitly during detector training, offering nuanced explanations unattainable through conventional methods. This enables global model understanding, spatially aware concept localization, and counterfactual what-if analysis, all contributing to a deeper comprehension of DF detection strategies.

Large Language Models (LLMs) and generative AI (GenAI) systems, such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, LLaMA, Copilot, Stable Diffusion by OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Stability AI, respectively, are revolutionizing cybersecurity, enabling both automated defense and sophisticated attacks. These technologies power real-time threat detection, phishing defense, secure code generation, and vulnerability exploitation at unprecedented scales. Following a rapid surge where LLM-generated malware grew to account for an estimated 50% of detected threats by 2025, up from just 2% in 2021, navigating this highly automated threat landscape in 2026 demands next-generation security frameworks. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of the beneficial and malicious applications of LLMs in cybersecurity, including zero-day detection, DevSecOps, federated learning, synthetic content analysis, and explainable AI (XAI). Drawing on a review of over 70 academic papers, industry reports, and technical documents, this work synthesizes insights from real-world case studies across platforms like Google Play Protect, Microsoft Defender, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Apple App Store, OpenAI Plugin Stores, Hugging Face Spaces, and GitHub, alongside emerging initiatives like the SAFE Framework and AI-driven anomaly detection. We conclude with practical recommendations for responsible and transparent LLM deployment and trustworthy AI, including model watermarking, adversarial defense, and cross-industry collaboration, setting a new benchmark for rigorous, holistic cybersecurity research at the intersection of AI and threat defense, and offering a roadmap for secure, scalable LLM systems that serves as a critical reference for researchers, engineers, and security leaders navigating the complex challenges of AI-driven cybersecurity.

Deep learning image classifiers achieve strong predictive performance yet remain opaque in how decisions are formed. A model may predict correctly while relying on irrelevant cues, shortcut associations, peripheral structures, or device level artifacts instead of task relevant regions. On large scale datasets this opacity is especially problematic, since inspecting heatmaps one sample at a time cannot scale to thousands of predictions. We propose Relevance Based Model Decision Explainability (ReMoDEx), a framework for systematic, dataset scale assessment of model decision behaviour in image classification. ReMoDEx defines a stepwise pipeline: model inference, target class selection, relevance map generation, heatmap standardisation, similarity based grouping of patterns, cluster level interpretation, and spatial relevance assessment. Local methods GradCAM++, Integrated Gradients, Occlusion Sensitivity, and Layerwise Relevance Propagation are each combined independently with a single global module that summarises an entire set of relevance maps into a few decision strategy clusters, replacing sample by sample inspection with an automatic, scalable summary. To demonstrate ReMoDEx, we applied it to a VGG16 based classifier distinguishing COVID-19, Normal, Lung Opacity, and Viral Pneumonia. The classifier showed stable performance (86.27% test accuracy, 0.9624 test AUC). However, each explainer combined with the global module consistently produced two recurring strategies: central thoracic region decisions and border/corner sensitive decisions, indicating possible shortcut learning that conventional metrics could not reveal. Masked image validation confirmed that model confidence and predicted class changed when central or peripheral regions were occluded. ReMoDEx thus provides a scalable relevance based decision assessment framework and an essential complement to accuracy based evaluation.

The XAI community has studied a wide range of queries and scores for explaining predictions of ML models. From a data management perspective, this proliferation of explanation notions calls for declarative query languages in which such notions can be specified, combined, and analyzed uniformly. In this paper, we develop such a framework for Boolean models. We first revisit FOIL, an interpretability query language for black-box models, and show that it has two fundamental limitations: it cannot express central optimality-based explanation queries, and its evaluation problem over decision trees is hard for every level of the polynomial hierarchy. We then introduce ExplAIner, a query language based on FOIL with an extended vocabulary and a layered structure. We show that ExplAIner can express a broad family of explanation notions, including abductive, contrastive, feature-based, and distance-based queries. We also prove that the evaluation problem for each query in ExplAIner belongs to the Boolean hierarchy over every class of Boolean models for which some basic predicates can be evaluated in polynomial time. In particular, that property holds for deterministic and decomposable Boolean circuits. Finally, we introduce Opt-FOIL, an optimization-oriented fragment of ExplAIner for computing explanations that are minimal with respect to strict partial orders, and prove that its evaluation problem is in $\mathrm{FP}^{\mathrm{NP}}$ under the same tractability assumptions. These complexity results have a direct algorithmic consequence: a fixed ExplAIner query can be evaluated with a fixed number of calls to a SAT solver, while a notion of explanation specified in Opt-FOIL can be computed with a polynomial number of such calls. This is particularly relevant in formal XAI, where SAT solvers have been successfully used to compute explanations for several classes of ML models.

In this work, we propose a unified approach for diagnosing misclassification and assessing the robustness of black-box classifiers. Central to our method is an optimization framework that modifies an instance so that the classifier predicts a specified target label, while ensuring that the modification remains easily explainable. The objective function contains two components: an explainability-aware $L_0$ (XA-$L_0$) penalty that promotes sparse and interpretable modifications, and a classifier loss objective that steers the perturbed instance toward the desired output. This integrated optimization formulation is used both to identify the underlying causes of misclassification and to evaluate robustness by determining how an instance can change within a tolerance region before being reassigned to another class. To quantify robustness, we introduce the Tolerance Region Confusion Matrix (TOR-Confusion Matrix), which measures a classifier's susceptibility by modeling the class-to-class transition probabilities induced by tolerance-bounded perturbations. We validate the proposed method on both image and tabular datasets, demonstrating its ability to jointly deliver interpretability and robustness assessment.

Foundation Models for Electronic Health Records (FEMRs) are pretrained on large-scale structured patient data, enabling them to convert longitudinal patient trajectories into generalizable representations for diverse clinical prediction tasks. Despite their effectiveness, FEMRs remain black-box models, raising concerns about bias, interpretability, and clinical trust. To address this, we propose the first token-level explainability approach for FEMRs. We train a Transformer-based surrogate model on input-output pairs from the FEMR across two prediction tasks, approximating its behavior while preserving temporal dynamics. We identify the most influential tokens, providing insights into how FEMRs leverage different aspects of patient history for predictions. To evaluate clinical relevance, we introduce a novel clinical alignment metric that quantifies the correspondence between the surrogate model's key tokens and clinically validated features. Our results demonstrate that the surrogate closely approximates FEMR predictions and that token-level explanations align well with clinical knowledge, offering a practical framework for interpretable and trustworthy clinical AI.

The adoption of non-parametric machine learning models for regulatory capital estimation introduces a fundamental governance challenge: the inability to explain model outputs in a manner auditable by supervisory bodies. This 'black box' problem remains a major barrier to the adoption of Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) and related ML architectures in ICAAP and CCAR workflows despite their predictive advantages over traditional parametric approaches. This paper addresses this barrier through SHARC (SHAP for Regulatory Capital), an explainability framework for the Hybrid GPR-HS architecture and its stress-testing extension. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), derived from cooperative game theory and satisfying the properties of Local Accuracy, Missingness, Consistency, and Efficiency, are applied to Stressed Value-at-Risk (SVaR) outputs under three macro scenarios: West Asia War, Climate Risk, and AI Bubble/Regulatory Burden. SHARC decomposes SVaR into baseline, mean-driven, and volatility-driven components, enabling transparent linkage between scenario design and capital outcomes. Two findings emerge. First, SHARC consistently links non-linear SVaR outputs to underlying scenario inputs, confirming framework fidelity and providing auditable traceability of capital drivers. Second, under stress conditions, the mean return component (directional loss magnitude) dominates the variance component (volatility baseline) in determining capital levels, with implications for capital limit-setting, position management, and hedging strategy. The results establish SHARC as a regulator-aligned explainability layer that makes the Hybrid GPR-HS framework fully auditable and consistent with FRTB, ICAAP Pillar 2, and CCAR transparency requirements.

Graph eXplainable AI (G-XAI) is increasingly important for making Graph Neural Networks interpretable and accountable. While a growing number of explainers are available, choosing the right method and assessing the trustworthiness of its outputs remains unclear. Consistent evaluation practices and actionable guidance are still missing, hindering practical adoption. In this paper, we introduce a unified, quantitative benchmarking framework for G-XAI that requires no ground-truth assumptions. We formalize tabular explainability metrics for graph data, evaluating topological structure and node features as independent components. Our large-scale benchmarking study identifies explainers that consistently lie on the Pareto front across metric pairs and tasks, establishing robustly non-dominated solutions - while confirming that no single explainer achieves universal superiority. We distill our findings into actionable G-XAI usability guidelines to support Machine Learning practitioners in evaluating and deploying trustworthy GNN-based pipelines.

Automated chest X-ray classification remains challenging due to severe class imbalance, co-occurring pathologies, and the loss of localized features in conventional architectures. To address these, we propose an explainable hierarchical multi-view ensemble framework for the robust classification of 14 thoracic pathologies. The framework employs view-specific training by independently modeling frontal and lateral radiographs using an ensemble of five complementary convolutional neural networks. Replacing global average pooling, a multi-scale feature fusion strategy augmented with Convolutional Block Attention Modules (CBAM) preserves fine-grained intermediate representations while emphasizing high-level pathology-specific semantic features. To mitigate positive-negative imbalance and varying inter-class difficulty, models are optimized using a novel hybrid objective combining Asymmetric Loss with Adaptive Focal Loss. Beyond simple probability averaging, the framework incorporates a hierarchical meta-learning strategy where test-time augmentation (TTA) predictions and cross-model uncertainty measures are integrated into Level-1 gradient-boosting meta-learners (XGBoost, LightGBM, and CatBoost), followed by Level-2 stacking with optimized alpha blending. Evaluated on a large-scale CheXpert-style dataset, the framework achieves state-of-the-art macro-average AUROC scores of 0.9319 for frontal and 0.9154 for lateral radiographs. Furthermore, comprehensive explainability analysis using seven post-hoc attribution techniques demonstrates strong anatomical consistency and clinically meaningful decision localization. By integrating architectural diversity, multi-scale attention, hierarchical meta-learning, and rigorous explainability, the proposed framework provides a transparent, highly accurate, and clinically practical computer-aided diagnosis system for thoracic disease classification.

Bangladesh has an estimated 1.17 mental-health professionals per 100,000 population and only six child psychiatrists nationwide. No Bengali-language, culturally adapted tool exists for early screening of abuse-related psychological trauma in children. We present ShishuRaksha AI, a decision-support (not diagnostic) framework that fuses four screening modalities: validated questionnaires (SDQ, CPSS), Bengali narrative text, House-Tree-Person (HTP) drawing features, and facial affect. The fusion is training-free and clinically weighted, uses cross-modal attention, and includes a single-modality override rule. Every risk score is explained through clinically weighted, perturbation-based additive attribution and rendered as a bilingual (Bangla/English) report with referral routing to national child-protection services (OCC, DSS, NMHH) under the Children Act 2013. No clinical dataset of abused children can be collected ethically at this stage, so we introduce a noise-aware synthetic benchmark (500 cases, 116 positive [23.2%], four deliberate noise layers, literature-grounded HTP priors) and evaluate tree-ensemble surrogates of the fusion design (facial channel excluded) under 5-fold stratified cross-validation. The fused model reaches an AUC of 0.874 [0.834-0.908], against 0.756 [0.705-0.803] for an SDQ-only baseline, with ablation, operating-point, subgroup, and calibration analyses. We state all limitations openly, including synthetic-only data, no held-out set, text-feature circularity, and an urban-rural subgroup gap. This work is a feasibility study and a design contribution toward ethically deployable child-protection screening in low-resource settings.

Temporal graphs are ubiquitous in real-world applications and Temporal Graph Networks (TGNs) have achieved superior predictive accuracy. Understanding which historical events drive model predictions can enhance trustworthiness of TGNs. Existing explanation methods overlook the memory module, the core component that records and updates node histories, leaving the influence of past events unexplored. To address this, we attribute TGNs predictions through the topology attribution tree and memory backtracking tree. The topology attribution tree captures the influence of neighbors and their memory vectors, then the memory backtracking tree quantifies how historical events shape node memory vectors. We apply the LRP in TGNs, ensuring that the total contribution of events equals the logits of model. Finally, top-k selection may be unfaithful due to the nonlinear mapping from logits to probabilities, we design optimization objectives to identify the important events. Experiments on nine temporal graph datasets, spanning node property prediction, link prediction tasks and graph classification tasks, show that our method provides faithful explanations and outperforms state-of-the-art baselines. The code is available at https://github.com/yazhengliu/MemExplainer

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.

Predicting cancer drug response from transcriptomic profiles is a cornerstone of precision oncology, yet the scientific value of machine learning models hinges not solely on predictive accuracy, but also on their capacity to generate reliable biological insights. Current explainability approaches in this setting are computationally costly, lack robustness, and reduce complex drug response to univariate gene importance scores, overlooking the coordinated gene activity that drives sensitivity and resistance. In this work, we present ILLUME+, a scalable post-hoc explainability framework that moves beyond single-gene assessments to capture multiple, complementary forms of explanation. Integrated into our end-to-end pipeline, ILLUME+ produces more stable gene importance scores than existing baselines, recovers established drug-gene associations and mechanisms of action, and enables AI-assisted hypothesis generation to uncover novel interaction-driven molecular signals in cancer biology.

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.

Digital forensic investigations of network intrusions require analytical outputs that are traceable, reproducible, and court-defensible - requirements existing machine learning pipelines do not satisfy, since they treat original evidence as training data and produce opaque classifications without instance-level justification. This paper presents a forensic-oriented intrusion detection framework resolving both problems simultaneously, integrating synthetic data generation, binary classification, and explainability within a single pipeline governed by ISO/IEC 27037, 27041, 27042, and NIST SP 800-86. The framework operationalises the ISO/IEC 27037 requirement for strict separation between original digital evidence and derived analytical artefacts. Original datasets are treated as immutable, hash-verified artefacts; all training operates on parameterized synthetic derivatives via SDV + CTGAN. XGBoost binary classification provides high-performance detection on tabular network flow data, and SHAP TreeExplainer produces instance-level feature attributions mapping statistical predictions to observable network behaviour for forensic reporting. Train-on-Synthetic, Test-on-Real (TSTR) evaluation on CICIDS2017 achieves F1-macro = 0.96, within cross-validation variance of the real-data baseline (0.97). Kolmogorov-Smirnov testing confirms synthetic privacy preservation (mean |KS| = 0.38) alongside operational utility. Cross-dataset validation on UNSW-NB15 and Kitsune identifies feature space dimensionality as the primary determinant of synthetic training effectiveness, establishing a practical deployment boundary of approximately 30 numeric flow-level features. SHAP attributions for Brute Force, Port Scan, and DoS attacks are consistent across real and synthetic instances, confirming synthetic training preserves forensically relevant attack fingerprints required for expert witness testimony.

Explainable AI (XAI) methods have demonstrated significant success in recent years at identifying relevant features in input data that drive deep learning model decisions, enhancing interpretability for users. However, the potential of XAI beyond providing model transparency has remained largely unexplored in adjacent machine learning domains. In this paper, we show for the first time how XAI can be utilized in the context of federated learning. Specifically, while federated learning enables collaborative model training without raw data sharing, it suffers from performance degradation when client data distributions exhibit statistical heterogeneity. We introduce FedXDS (Federated Learning via XAI-guided Data Sharing), the first approach to utilize feature attribution techniques to identify precisely which data elements should be selectively shared between clients to mitigate heterogeneity. By employing propagation-based attribution, our method identifies task-relevant features through a single backward pass, enabling selective data sharing that aligns client contributions. To protect sensitive information, we incorporate metric privacy techniques that provide formal privacy guarantees while preserving utility. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach consistently achieves higher accuracy and faster convergence compared to existing methods across varying client numbers and heterogeneity settings. We provide theoretical privacy guarantees and empirically demonstrate robustness against both membership inference and feature inversion attacks. Code is available at https://github.com/MaxH1996/FedXDS.

Medical Artificial Intelligence (AI) is widely expected to transform clinical practice, yet the decision-making processes of many Machine Learning (ML) models remain opaque. Explainability has been advanced as a partial remedy to clarify why AI generates predictions, particularly in high-stakes contexts. Despite ongoing efforts, debates on what constitutes an adequate medical explanation remain unsettled. Yet, explanation has long been a central topic of inquiry in the philosophy of science and medicine. The insights developed in these fields, however, have been largely overlooked in contemporary explainable AI (XAI) research, leaving its foundational assumptions insufficiently examined. To address this gap, this paper develops a critical review at the intersection of philosophy of science and XAI. It examines prevailing accounts of what counts as an explanation in the health sciences and assesses their adequacy for informing XAI in medicine, arguing that they provide necessary conditions for a philosophically grounded approach to explainability in this domain. Building on this foundational philosophical literature, the discussion identifies three central axes of analysis: the role of causality in medical reasoning, the epistemic and relational dimensions of medical trust, and the criteria of explanatory adequacy as shaped by the pragmatic needs of diverse stakeholders. By integrating philosophical analysis with current developments in medical AI, the paper outlines principles for designing XAI systems that offer explanations that are not only epistemically robust but also aligned with the epistemic and practical requirements of clinical decision-making, shaping ongoing debates in medical XAI toward underexplored conceptual foundations.

Speech conveys rich emotional information. As Speech Emotion Recognition (SER) is usually deployed in privacy-sensitive and reliability-critical environments, adversarial attacks on SER have attracted increasing attention. Existing sparse attacks control the number of perturbed elements, yet, they often lack explainability guidance and explicit measures of explanation consistency. A unified treatment of sparsity and magnitude constraints is also uncommon. In addition, transferability across attack families and target models remains limited. Hence, we propose a SalIency-Guided sparse Mask Attack (SIGMA). On self-supervised speech features, we use post-hoc explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques to produce saliency maps and identify the scope of the mask, and then restrict magnitude-bounded updates to this mask. The mask is computed once and can be reused across models and different sparsity attacks to amortise cost. We evaluate on the IEMOCAP and TESS datasets. Under matched budgets and across multiple sparse-attack settings, SIGMA maintains competitive attack success rates, navigating a conscious trade-off between attack efficacy and explanation consistency. SIGMA therefore provides an efficient and interpretable framework for analysing the vulnerability and explanation behaviour of SER models under structured perturbations.

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.

Artificial intelligence is transforming biodiversity monitoring by enabling automated analysis of ecological imagery collected from camera traps, drones, satellites, underwater platforms, and other sensing systems. These tools can expand the scale and speed of conservation assessments, yet many computer vision models remain difficult to inspect, making it challenging to determine whether predictions are based on ecologically meaningful signals or on spurious correlations, sampling biases, and other artifacts that may undermine conservation decisions. We argue that explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) should become a standard component of ecological model validation because conservation practitioners increasingly depend on understanding not only whether a model is accurate, but why it is accurate. We provide practical guidance for applying XAI to three common ecological computer vision tasks: image classification, object detection, and image segmentation. To illustrate how XAI can support ecological model auditing, refinement, and deployment, we present two case studies using aerial imagery: harbor seal detection and cetacean anatomical segmentation. These examples demonstrate how explanation methods can identify biologically meaningful cues, reveal false positives driven by background and shape confounds, uncover edge and occlusion effects, and guide data collection, augmentation, and retraining strategies. More broadly, they show how explainability can help assess whether model reasoning aligns with ecological understanding. We conclude by identifying key challenges and opportunities. By making model behavior more transparent and scientifically interrogable, XAI can help ensure that AI-supported ecological evidence is more reliable, understandable, and actionable for biodiversity conservation.

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.

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.