Explainable AI Methods

Momentum

23 papers in the last four weeks, up 10% on the four weeks before. 0.3% of all new papers.

Jul 6Week of Sep 21

Latest papers 230

Jun 12, 2026cs.LG

Beyond a Single Explanation of the Adam--SGD Gap

Prior work has identified several factors that can contribute to the performance gap between Adam and SGD, spanning data aspects, architecture design, and optimization properties. Yet these explanations are often studied in isolation, leaving their relative importance unclear. In this work, we revisit these hypotheses through a controlled empirical study across vision, language, genomics, and graph tasks, spanning modern and classical architectures, and carefully designed training setups. Our results suggest that no single factor consistently explains the Adam--SGD gap. For instance, the Adam advantage can (1) persist under a uniform vocabulary distribution yet nearly disappear under a heavy-tailed one; (2) reverse in favor of SGD in softmax-attention models; and (3) become larger under soft architectural modifications, e.g., when ReLU is replaced by a GeLU nonlinearity. This suggests that the gap arises from nontrivial data and architecture interactions, rather than from a single common factor. Yet, we observe a pattern across our settings: a \emph{crossover batch size} at which the relative advantage shifts from SGD to Adam as the batch size scales. These empirical results are captured by our theoretical gap model, which predicts this batch-size-dependent crossover. Our perspective helps reconcile several existing hypotheses while offering practical insights across domains.
Jun 11, 2026cs.CY

Position: Align AI to Our Aspirations, Not Our Flaws

We argue that aligning AI to aggregated human preferences is the wrong target. With current technology, one can train AIs to share the values of a Silicon Valley techno-optimist, a degrowth environmentalist, a national-conservative culture warrior, a single-party state cadre, or a devout religious traditionalist. We should not. Human values produce societies that thrive or fail on the merits of those values - from failed states and extreme inequality to declining happiness, political polarization, and government dysfunction in the world's wealthiest democracies. The pluralistic-alignment program correctly diagnoses that there is no single "humanity" to align with, but is dangerous if taken as the main directive. We argue that AI should be trained to a non-negotiable floor of objective alignment goals - competence, bounded by the constraints of factual accuracy, honesty, and lawfulness and that pluralism belongs at the surface (language, register, conventions, missing-context defaults) and across the wide band of legitimate value tradeoffs that respect the floor, but not at the level of values that violate it. We highlight the empirical reality of unfiltered pluralistic values, propose four commitments as a constructive alternative, and engage six credible objections: commercial pressure and practical feasibility, democratic legitimacy, regulatory compliance, over-reliance on institutionalist explanations, the charge that the floor itself is culturally laden, and the limits of Coherent Extrapolated Volition.
Jun 10, 2026cs.CL

Observable Patterns Are Not Explanations: A Causal-Geometric Analysis of Latent Reasoning Models

Latent reasoning models (LRMs) replace explicit chain-of-thought with continuous thoughts. Recent work treats observable latent-state patterns, such as BFS-like frontiers and decodable arithmetic computation, as evidence for internal reasoning mechanisms. Evaluating two LRMs (Coconut and CODI) against controls lacking the proposed recurrence or curriculum, we find these patterns also appear in the controls and do not always causally affect behavior. Causal interventions reveal that latent-thought utilization is not binary but graded, scaling with a thought's causal effect on model behavior. Geometric analyses reveal this effect concentrates in low-rank directions whose step-to-step geometry grows more structured as their behavioral influence increases. Latent thoughts should therefore be treated as hidden computation, not hidden explanation: decodability, attention, or static structure alone cannot establish mechanism. LRM interpretability thus requires matched controls and causal tests.
Jun 9, 2026cs.AI

Forecasting Future Behavior as a Learning Task

Trust in an AI system is often anchored by explanations of how it works, which one then uses to forecast its behavior on new inputs. For large reasoning models (LRMs), this conventional route is particularly difficult to follow: explanation methods for single token generations do not naturally generalize to long trajectories, and the trajectories themselves are often not faithful when read as natural language. We propose an alternative that bypasses the explanation step: treat behavior forecasting as a learnable task and train Behavior Forecasters that operates on a single reasoning trajectory to make the same forecasts one would typically seek from an explanation. The forecaster's training data is obtained by querying the LRM with no human annotation, and its inference is done in a single forward pass. We instantiate this approach on two tasks: how likely the LRM is to repeat its answer on re-runs, and how removing parts of the input changes its answer. We evaluate this approach on both tasks across three diverse reasoning datasets and find that trained Behavior Forecasters are more accurate than GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus-4.6 reading the same trajectories as naive readers, at a small fraction of their inference cost. We find that fine-tuning the backbone end-to-end and initializing it from the target LRM are each necessary for strong performance. These results show that the reasoning trajectory carries information about the LRM's future behavior that goes beyond what naive reading conveys.
Jun 9, 2026cs.CL

Large Language Models as Modal Models in Linguistics

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has intensified debates about their significance for linguistic theory. These debates are commonly divided into three positions: insulationism, which regards LLMs as irrelevant to human language; eliminativism, which claims that LLMs can replace traditional linguistic theories; and conciliationism, which views them as useful tools for linguistic research. To clarify these positions, this paper applies the framework of modal modeling from the philosophy of science. We argue that LLMs possess genuine epistemic value as minimal models, even without structural correspondence to human cognition. In particular, they can provide how-possibly explanations (HPEs) by testing modal claims about language acquisition and linguistic competence. We then examine the conditions under which LLMs could qualify as how-actually explanations (HAEs) of human language, drawing on the mechanistic account of scientific explanation. We argue that current LLMs do not yet satisfy these requirements. On the basis of this analysis, we propose understanding the explanatory power of LLMs as lying on a continuum between HPEs and HAEs. This framework avoids both overstating and understating their explanatory significance and offers a more precise basis for evaluating the role of LLMs in the scientific study of language.
Jun 9, 2026cs.LG

Beyond Explaining Predictions: Logic-Based Explanations for Confidence in Machine Learning Models

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.
Jun 5, 2026cs.AI

Beyond Post-hoc Explanation: Toward Glassbox AI via Probabilistic Mediation

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.
Jun 5, 2026cs.CL

Explain Like I'm 5 or Whatever I Choose: Evaluating the Interactive Potential of Language Model Responses

Evaluations of large language models (LLMs) in scientific information seeking tasks have become increasingly use-centric, such as conducting live or multi-turn evaluations with real users. These evaluations still assume a single, static chat interface, but as models are integrated into new interfaces, evaluations must shift to incorporate interface-specific criteria. We propose a new evaluation framework based on a formative study with 1616 participants that tests models' ability to generate multiple responses to one query that differ along an interpretable axis of language (language complexity), inspired by direct manipulation interfaces from human-centered design literature. We evaluate GPT-5.1, GPT-5 mini, Claude Sonnet 4.5 + Thinking, and DeepSeek-V3.1 by generating 5 responses at different levels of language complexity for 9898 scientific queries. While models vary complexity across responses, most changes remain inconsistent, with the best performing model (Claude Sonnet 4.5) only shifting reliable complexity measures in the correct direction 46%46\% of the time. Our findings hold with increased sample size and alternative complexity levels.
Jun 3, 2026cs.LG

Explainably Safe Reinforcement Learning

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.
May 31, 2026cs.CL

Not All Explanations Simulate Equally: Comparing Verbalized Feature Attributions and Self-Generated Rationales

Natural-language explanations are often treated as a unified interface for understanding model behavior, but different explanation sources may support simulation in different ways. This paper compares two families of explanations for question answering models: verbalized feature attributions and self-generated rationales. We evaluate them under a shared counterfactual simulation setting, using an LLM judge as predictor and measuring whether it can better predict a model's answers to follow-up questions when given its explanation. Across multiple instruction-tuned models, we analyze how explanation source, verbalization strategy, and feature granularity affect the simulatability of explanations. Our results show that explanation format and granularity affect simulatability: attribution-based explanations and self-generated rationales differ in how much they improve counterfactual prediction, with effects that vary across models and formats.
May 29, 2026stat.ML

Counterfactual Explanations for Deep Two-Sample Testing

Two-sample testing is a fundamental tool for detecting distributional differences across scientific domains, but classical tests (including kernel-based tests) can be ineffective on high-dimensional structured data such as images. Recent deep two-sample tests improve sensitivity in these settings by learning informative representations, yet they provide limited insight into which data features drive rejection of the null hypothesis H0H_0. To address this issue, we propose a counterfactual explanation framework for deep two-sample testing that generates sample-level edits moving observations from a source group toward a target group while explicitly reducing the discrepancy measured by the test. Our method combines a diffusion autoencoder with a pretrained deep two-sample test model and optimizes a maximum mean discrepancy (MMD) objective in the test model's representation space to produce plausible counterfactuals. We quantify distribution-level effects through changes in the test statistic and the resulting two-sample p-values. We evaluate the method on synthetic 2D shape datasets and two MRI cohorts. Across both settings, the counterfactual transformations consistently increase p-values relative to the original samples, indicating that the edited source set becomes statistically closer to the target distribution under the test. We measure minimality using LPIPS to ensure the counterfactuals remain close to the original samples. The resulting edits provide interpretable evidence of the features associated with the detected group differences. On MRI, the localized changes are consistent with known anatomical differences between cohorts.
May 29, 2026stat.ML

Entropic Projection Alignment: Estimating, Explaining, and Improving Model Performance Under Distribution Shift

We propose a unified framework for addressing three key challenges of distribution shift: (1) estimating a model's performance on an unlabeled target domain, (2) explaining the shift by identifying the features responsible, and (3) improving the target domain performance. Our method, Entropic Projection Alignment (EPA), aligns the source distribution to the target by matching carefully selected moments while simultaneously minimising the KL divergence from the source. This formulation yields a unique closed-form solution for importance weights, achieving robustness through implicit variance control. Drawing on domain adaptation theory, we establish that moment matching is sufficient for reliable estimation and adaptation, avoiding the need for full density ratio recovery. Extensive experiments, together with strong theoretical guarantees, demonstrate that EPA consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines while offering substantial computational efficiency.
May 28, 2026cs.AI

Xetrieval: Mechanistically Explaining Dense Retrieval

Explaining why dense retrievers assign high relevance scores remains challenging because retrieval decisions are made through opaque high-dimensional embeddings. Existing explanations often focus on surface signals, such as lexical matches, token alignments, or post-hoc textual rationales, and thus provide limited insight into the latent factors that shape dense retrieval behavior at the embedding level. We propose \textit{Xetrieval}, an embedding-level mechanistic framework for explaining dense retrieval. \textit{Xetrieval} first introduces a lightweight reasoning internalizer that approximates Chain-of-Thought reasoning directly in the embedding space with a single forward pass, enriching sentence embeddings with reasoning-oriented information while avoiding expensive autoregressive generation. It then decomposes these reasoning-enhanced embeddings into sparse, human-interpretable features, each associated with a coherent natural language description. By aggregating sparse feature overlaps across multiple document-side views, \textit{Xetrieval} provides feature-level explanations of individual retrieval decisions. Experiments on diverse retrievers and benchmarks show that \textit{Xetrieval} uncovers coherent interpretable features, yields stronger pair-level intervention effects, and supports task-level feature steering. The project page and source code are available at https://hihiczx.github.io/Xetrieval .
May 27, 2026cs.CL

Persona Prompting in Multimodal Urban Perception: Descriptive Convergence and Interpretive Variation

This study examines how persona prompting shapes language generated by two multimodal large language models in urban perception, a setting for examining subjective interpretations of shared visual evidence. We organize outputs into three functional layers: descriptive grounding (captions), intermediate semantic layer (perception tags), and interpretive framing (justifications). Using approximately 60,000 persona-conditioned annotations from each of two MLLMs, Qwen3-VL and Gemma4, we find that captions converge strongly across persona profiles and show only small attribute-associated differences. Justifications vary substantially more: economic status produces the largest difference in both models, with political orientation and personality also prominent. Paired image-level comparisons confirm larger justification than caption differences for these three attributes. For perception tags, personas sharing the same attribute level produce more similar tag sets than personas with different attribute levels, with the largest separation observed for economic status. Exploratory topic analysis further suggests persona-specific evaluative emphasis. Across models, profile-pair similarity patterns are strongly correlated for all three output types, although agreement is lowest for justifications. Overall, persona prompting affects interpretive framing more strongly than descriptive grounding.
May 27, 2026cs.RO

Ontology-Guided Reasoning for Affordance-Based Explanations of Robot Navigation

This paper proposes ontology-guided reasoning for affordance-based explanations of robot navigation. In human environments, it is not sufficient for a robot to detect that its route is blocked. It must also reason about what nearby objects afford, which state changes are possible, and which of these changes would allow it to continue safely. We address this problem by representing nearby entities, their affordances, affordance states, and qualitative spatial relations in a local affordance ontology and by evaluating hypothetical object--affordance state changes as candidate explanation factors. This yields explanations that are not only semantically grounded but also actionable. We instantiate the approach in a lightweight benchmark centered on a robot librarian scenario and evaluate it on procedurally generated navigation cases. The results show that ontology-guided reasoning identifies relevant explanation factors more accurately than a semantic-only baseline and remains robust as semantic clutter increases. Overall, the paper argues that affordance ontologies can serve not merely as semantic descriptions of the environment, but as reasoning foundations for explainability and reliable robot autonomy.
May 27, 2026cs.AI

Explaining is Harder Than Predicting Alone: Evaluating Concept-based Explanations of MLLMs as ICL Visual Classifiers

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.
May 27, 2026cs.CL

Auditing Stance Asymmetry in Generative Explanations

Bias evaluation for language models has made substantial progress on bounded comparisons, such as overt derogation, stereotype association, or label-sensitive differences under controlled substitutions. Open-ended explanations raise a different problem: they guide interpretation by assigning responsibility, legitimacy, context, and grievance. A model can avoid hostile language while making one side structurally understandable and another personally at fault, overreacting, or less worth taking seriously. We call this stance-bearing asymmetry in generative explanations. We propose Symmetry Decomposition Evaluation (SDE), which tests paired situations with concrete group labels, structural-role rewrites, and explicit support or counter-evidence. In a controlled 32-family prototype suite, this decomposition shows that surface differences are not all alike: some weaken under structural or evidence control, while others remain as stable differences in how the model assigns blame, context, or legitimacy. Targeted case review and judge comparison suggest a broader difficulty for evaluating open-ended framing asymmetries: judge readings shift across operationalizations, and scalar scores can flatten distinctions that readers use to interpret explanatory stance. SDE therefore reframes generative bias evaluation as an audit of explanatory stance -- what stance each side receives, how it changes under decomposition, and where automatic scoring becomes unstable.
May 26, 2026cs.LG

Evaluating Local Explainability Metrics for Machine Learning Models on Tabular Data

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.
May 26, 2026cs.CL

Quality Without Usefulness: LLM-Generated XAI Narratives as Trust Heuristics Rather Than Decision Aids

Prior work shows that Large Language Models (LLMs) can transform Explainable AI (XAI) outputs into Natural Language Explanations (NLEs) that score highly on quality metrics such as plausibility, coherence, and comprehensibility. But does explanation quality translate to practical usefulness? We investigate this question in a time-series energy forecasting domain through five controlled experiments (2,730 judgments across 60 test instances), each operationalising a distinct facet of usefulness studied in the XAI literature. Holding NLE quality constant at the high levels established by a prior factorial study, we find that NLEs do not improve task accuracy on any of the five tasks, while inflating self-reported confidence. A placebic control shows that this confidence boost is driven by text presence rather than content. In an out-of-distribution detection task, NLEs reduce the LLM judge's ability to flag unreliable predictions, providing false reassurance that masks model failure. We characterise these findings as the Quality-Usefulness Gap and argue that evaluation of the XAI-to-NLE pipeline must extend beyond text-quality metrics to downstream task performance.
May 25, 2026cs.LG

Electricity Consumption Forecasting: An Approach Using Cooperative Ensemble Learning with SHapley Additive exPlanations

Electricity expense management presents significant challenges, as this resource is susceptible to various influencing factors. In universities, the demand for this resource is rapidly growing with institutional expansion and has a significant environmental impact. In this study, the machine learning models long short-term memory (LSTM), random forest (RF), support vector regression (SVR), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) were trained with historical consumption data from the Federal Institute of Paraná (IFPR) over the last seven years and climatic variables to forecast electricity consumption 12 months ahead. Datasets from two campuses were adopted. To improve model performance, feature selection was performed using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP), and hyperparameter optimization was carried out using genetic algorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO). The results indicate that the proposed cooperative ensemble learning approach named Weaker Separator Booster (WSB) exhibited the best performance for datasets. Specifically, it achieved an sMAPE of 13.90% and MAE of 1990.87 kWh for the IFPR-Palmas Campus and an sMAPE of 18.72% and MAE of 465.02 kWh for the Coronel Vivida Campus. The SHAP analysis revealed distinct feature importance patterns across the two IFPR campuses. A commonality that emerged was the strong influence of lagged time-series values and a minimal influence of climatic variables.
May 24, 2026cs.CL

They Are Not the Same: Direct Causes Are Not Grounded Emotion Explanations

Emotion-Cause Pair Extraction (ECPE) was introduced to explain why an emotion occurs, but this goal is now often reduced to binary pair/non-pair prediction. This proxy is useful for direct-cause extraction, yet easy to over-read as evidence grounded emotion explanation. We show that this interpretation is only partially valid. In IEMO-MECP, 90.9% of original positives remain emo-cause and 95.0% of original negatives remain non-pair, confirming that the binary ECPE task is largely preserved. The problem is that direct triggers alone do not constitute a grounded explanation. Emo-context, an utterance that helps interpret a target emotion without directly causing it, appears on both sides of the original boundary and is enriched near binary uncertainty, showing that the binary boundary has no stable place for such discourse evidence. Across evaluated ECPE models, direct triggers are recovered more reliably than contextual support. Under shortcut pressure, this imbalance becomes consequential. Binary-trained models assign higher pair scores to nearby lexically similar non-pair candidates than to evidence supported but structurally harder emo-cause and emo-context pairs. Thus, pair scores can reward convenient attributions over grounded explanations. High binary ECPE performance indicates that a model can identify direct triggers; it does not indicate that the model has explained the emotion. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/panzhzh/ECPExsame.
May 24, 2026cs.CL

Re-defining Humor Data Objects for AI Humor Research

In most existing AI humor research, humor was treated as either "present" or "not present." We explore the concept of humor as a social interaction with context and explanations. During this project, we defined a humor reasoning data object and developed a way to prompt LLMs to generate an explanation of humor effective for general population. We iterated from an earlier prompt to an improved prompt, found that the later version reduced important errors, and then scaled generation to a large number of data objects which have the potential to enable data synthesis and data augmentation for AI humor research. Our main takeaway is that better prompting of an LLM improves humor explanation quality, especially by handling missing context, multi-modality, and transcript issues more carefully. These results establish a strong foundation for future work on AI understanding of humor as social behavior. All code and data are available at: https://github.com/anna-arnett/ai-humor/ .
May 23, 2026cs.LG

Aligning Molecular Graph Explanations with Chemical Identity via InChIfied Invariants

Obtaining consistent explanations for machine learning on molecular graphs requires predictions and attributions to be aligned with chemical identity. However, chemically equivalent drawings of the same molecule can induce different molecular representations, leading to inconsistent predictions and explanations. Here, we introduce InChIfied Invariants, a class of node, edge, and graph features based on the International Chemical Identifier (InChI) and designed to be invariant under transformations that preserve chemical identity. Using one million molecular graphs from PubChem Substances, we show that InChIfied Invariants produce identical representations for chemically equivalent graphs in 99.62% of cases, whereas standard Daylight invariants do so in only 0.35% of cases. Across MoleculeNet tasks, InChIfied Invariants preserve predictive performance while significantly improving prediction consistency across alternative graph depictions of the same molecules. We further perform a quantitative attribution analysis and show that explanations produced with standard molecular featurization methods vary substantially across chemically equivalent graphs, while InChIfied Invariants enforce consistent attributions by construction. We release open-source software implementing InChIfied Invariants, which can be used as a drop-in replacement for standard molecular graph features.
May 22, 2026cs.LG

Verified SHAP: Provable Bounds for Exact Shapley Values of Neural Networks

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.
May 22, 2026cs.HC

Human Decision-Making with Persuasive and Narrative LLM Explanations

Large language models (LLMs) have the potential to aid and improve human decision-making in classification tasks, not only by providing fairly accurate predictions, but also in their ability to generate cogent narrative explanations of those predictions. Prior work has demonstrated that people generally find AI narrative explanations to be understandable, trustworthy, and convincing for changing beliefs and opinions; however, less is known about the impact of narrative explanations on objective human decision-making performance. Here we conduct a large-scale human behavioral experiment to evaluate decision-making performance with LLM-generated narrative explanations of varying persuasiveness. We found the degree of persuasiveness, or lack thereof, for LLM-based explanations did not meaningfully impact decision accuracy over a simple AI prediction alone, in agreement with typical results with explainable AI based on feature importance. We found evidence that narratives increased reliance on AI, but both when the AI prediction was correct and incorrect. Exploratory analyses also indicated that the more persuasive narratives may have had a detrimental effect on decision response times and the ability to discriminate between a correct and incorrect AI prediction. Overall, this work indicates that including narrative explanations with AI predictions may involve tradeoffs for decision-making performance, and more work is needed to determine how and when narrative explanations impact human decision-making.
May 21, 2026cs.RO

Robots That Know What to Ask: Recovering Misaligned Rewards through Targeted Explanations

Learning reward functions from demonstrations assumes that demonstrations provide adequate supervision over all features -- or task-relevant aspects of behavior. In practice, demonstrations are often imperfect: humans may under-emphasize certain features due to cognitive load or physical difficulty, or the training regime may fail to sufficiently cover all relevant situations. In either case, important features may be underspecified, leading to ambiguity in the learned reward function and misaligned behavior at deployment. We propose a framework that detects such underspecified features and actively solicits targeted corrective demonstrations. Our key insight is that demonstrations implicitly reveal which features are well specified: features that are consistently optimized show little variation across demonstrations, while features that are underspecified vary widely. We leverage this statistical signal to infer which features may have been insufficiently demonstrated. The robot then explains which features it is uncertain about in natural language and queries for demonstrations that explicitly address the identified gaps. We evaluate our approach in a simulated tabletop manipulation domain and in a user study with a real Franka robot. Targeted, explanation-guided queries significantly improve reward recovery compared to random querying and passive data collection, reducing ambiguity that would otherwise persist in learning from imperfect demonstrations.
May 21, 2026cs.LG

Towards Verifiable Transformers: Solver-Checkable Circuit Explanations

Mechanistic interpretability often identifies circuits inside Transformer models, but explanations of those circuits are usually validated through examples, ablations, and manual reasoning. This leaves a gap between finding a plausible circuit and proving what the circuit does. We introduce Verifiable Transformers, a framework for converting task-localized Transformer circuits into bounded, solver-checkable claims. Given a behavior, a finite task domain, and a candidate-token projection, we extract a task circuit and verify properties such as projected functional equivalence, edge necessity, task-relevant invariance, and final-residual robustness. Direct verification encodes the extracted circuit itself into an SMT solver. When a circuit contains operators that are not exactly or tractably encodable, surrogate-mediated verification fits an SMT-encodable surrogate, validates it against the extracted circuit over the bounded domain, and verifies symbolic explanations against the surrogate. We instantiate direct verification with a GPT-style architecture using Signed L1 BandNorm, sparsemax attention, and LeakyReLU. On small symbolic sequence tasks, we train an SMT-representable Transformer, extract sparse circuits for quote closing and bracket type tracking, and exhaustively verify projected functional equivalence, content invariance, edge necessity, and final-residual robustness. At GPT-2 scale, the same operator stack trains stably on OpenWebText, although naive direct SMT verification remains intractable. We also demonstrate surrogate-mediated verification on task-localized circuits with hard-to-encode attention, showing both verified symbolic explanations and solver-generated counterexamples. The goal is not full-model verification, but a concrete path for turning mechanistic circuit explanations into formal propositions that can be proven or refuted.
May 21, 2026cs.LG

Geometry-Adaptive Explainer for Faithful Dictionary-Based Interpretability under Distribution Shift

Mechanistic interpretability aims to explain a model's behavior by identifying causally responsible internal structures. Dictionary-based explainers such as sparse autoencoders and transcoders are a primary tool, but their faithfulness under out-of-distribution (OOD) shift has received little systematic attention. We show that distribution shift rotates the subspace that the model actively uses, misaligning the explainer's dictionary trained on in-distribution (ID) activations. We formalize this misalignment as the faithfulness gap, a geometric distance between the ID dictionary and the OOD-active subspace, and show that it controls OOD faithfulness degradation. To reduce this gap, we propose the Geometry-Adaptive Explainer (GAE), which realigns the explainer's dictionary with the OOD-active subspace while preserving the original feature structure. This requires only unlabeled OOD activations and no gradient updates. We prove that GAE improves over the unadapted ID explainer, with excess loss bounded quadratically by the second-moment shift. Empirically, GAE even matches or surpasses all training-based baselines in causal faithfulness across multiple models and OOD settings.
May 20, 2026cs.LG

Alike Parts: A Feature-Informed Approach to Local and Global Prototype Explanations

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.
May 20, 2026cs.HC

Exploring the Effectiveness of Using LLMs for Automated Assessment of Student Self Explanations in Programming Education

Worked examples are step-by-step solutions to problems in a specific domain, offered to students to acquire domain-specific problem-solving skills. The effectiveness of worked examples could be enhanced by combining them with self-explanations, which ask students to explain rather than passively study each problem-solving step. The main challenge of this approach is assessing the correctness of the student's explanations. In the prevailing approach, student explanations are judged by their semantic similarity to an instructor's or domain expert's explanation. Given recent advances in LLM-based automated scoring, it remains unclear whether semantic similarity methods are still the most effective technique to automatically score textual student responses like essays or code explanations. Comparing these methods also requires quality datasets that offer distinctive features such as balanced class distributions and domain-specific labeled data for automated scoring tasks. In this paper, we present a rigorous comparison between LLMs and semantic similarity used for automated scoring, framed as a binary classification task.
May 19, 2026cs.LG

ST-TGExplainer: Disentangling Stability and Transition Patterns for Temporal GNN Interpretability

Temporal graph neural networks (TGNNs) have gained significant traction for solving real-world temporal graph tasks. However, their interpretability remains limited, as most TGNNs fail to identify which historical interactions most influence a given prediction. Despite promising progress on interpretable TGNNs, existing methods predominantly focus on previously seen historical interactions, which we term stability patterns, while overlooking newly emerging first-time interactions, which we term transition patterns. Both types of patterns are essential for faithful temporal explanations. To address this limitation, we propose ST-TGExplainer, a self-explainable TGNN that disentangles Stability and Transition patterns in temporal graphs for a more faithful Temporal GNN Explainer. Guided by a disentangled information bottleneck objective, ST-TGExplainer learns a compact explanatory subgraph that remains predictive of the event label while explicitly suppressing label-conditioned redundancy between stability and transition patterns. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ST-TGExplainer achieves strong predictive performance and yields more faithful explanations. Code is available at https://github.com/hjchen-hdu/ST-TGExplainer.
May 19, 2026cs.CL

Lost in Interpretation: The Plausibility-Faithfulness Trade-off in Cross-Lingual Explanations

LLMs deployed multilingually are often audited via English explanations for non-English inputs. We evaluate extractive explanations ''where the model identifies input token spans as evidence alongside a generated rationale'' and uncover a systematic trade-off: English-pivot explanations can achieve higher span agreement with human rationales while their evidence becomes less causally grounded in the model's prediction, as measured by both comprehensiveness and sufficiency. Across 3 tasks, 5languages, and 2multilingual LLM families, we find that English explanations frequently produce fluent but loosely anchored rationales, with comprehensiveness degrading by up to 5.7x relative to native-language conditions - even as task accuracy remains stable across settings. For socially nuanced classification, English pivots also fail to preserve pragmatic cues, reducing both faithfulness and span agreement. We recommend auditing explanations in the input language, reporting multi-faceted faithfulness metrics beyond lexical overlap, and treating English rationales as communication summaries rather than faithful decision traces.
May 18, 2026cs.CV

MotionMERGE: A Multi-granular Framework for Human Motion Editing, Reasoning, Generation, and Explanation

Recent motion-language models unify tasks like comprehension and generation but operate at a coarse granularity, lacking fine-grained understanding and nuanced control over body parts needed for animation or interaction. This stems from fundamental issues in both the model and the data, in which the model can't focus on motion's localized pattern, and the training data lacks fine-grained supervision. To tackle this, we propose MotionMERGE, a unified framework that bridges the granularity gap. First, we pioneer the study of fine-grained languageguided motion control, including detailed understanding and localized editing, by explicitly modeling motion at part and temporal levels within a single LLM, thereby endowing the model with robust priors for precise control. Second, we design ReasoningAware Granularity-Synergy pre-training, a novel strategy that employs joint supervision for cross-granularity alignment, temporal grounding, localized alignment, motion coherency, and motion-grounded chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning. This equips the model with fine-grained motion-language alignment, crossgranularity synergy, and explicit reasoning ability. Third, we curate MotionFineEdit, a large-scale dataset (837K atomic + 144K complex triplets) with the first fine-grained spatio-temporal corrective instructions and motion-grounded CoT annotations, establishing a new benchmark for fine-grained text-driven motion editing and motion-grounded reasoning. Extensive experiments demonstrate the capability of MotionMERGE for more precise motion generation, understanding, and editing, and compelling zero-shot generalization to other complex motion tasks. This work represents a significant step toward models that interact with motion in finer granularity and human-like reasoning.
May 18, 2026cs.AI

Learning Quantifiable Visual Explanations Without Ground-Truth

Explainable AI (XAI) techniques are increasingly important for the validation and responsible use of modern deep learning models, but are difficult to evaluate due to the lack of good ground-truth to compare against. We propose a framework that serves as a quantifiable metric for the quality of XAI methods, based on continuous input perturbation. Our metric formally considers the sufficiency and necessity of the attributed information to the model's decision-making, and we illustrate a range of cases where it aligns better with human intuitions of explanation quality than do existing metrics. To exploit the properties of this metric, we also propose a novel XAI method, considering the case where we fine-tune a model using a differentiable approximation of the metric as a supervision signal. The result is an adapter module that can be trained on top of any black-box model to output causal explanations of the model's decision process, without degrading model performance. We show that the explanations generated by this method outperform those of competing XAI techniques according to a number of quantifiable metrics.
May 18, 2026stat.ML

Generalized Functional ANOVA in Closed-Form: A Unified View of Additive Explanations

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.
May 18, 2026cs.CL

iPOE: Interpretable Prompt Optimization via Explanations

Prompt optimization has often been framed as a discrete search problem to find high-performing and robust instructions for a large language model (LLM). However, the search result might not make it transparent why and where specific prompt changes lead to performance gains. This is in contrast to how humans are instructed for annotation tasks. Here, researchers carefully design annotation guidelines, leading to enhanced annotation consistency. Our paper aims at joining these two approaches and introduces iPOE, a novel interpretable prompt optimization strategy via explanations. We guide the prompt optimization process by automatically created guidelines from explanations of annotation decisions (either automatically generated or from humans). This set of guidelines is furthermore optimized by a series of operations, including removing, adding, shuffling, and merging. The resulting prompt includes guidelines that instruct the annotation, making the decision process of the LLM and the optimization transparent. It therefore supports also laypeople in prompt optimization. In our experiments on four datasets, we find that iPOE can improve over the evaluated baselines by up to 39% and LLM explanations can replace human explanations in the proposed method. Moreover, our interpretability validation study demonstrates that humans and LLMs substantially agree on which guidelines contribute to their annotations, achieving a Cohen's kappa score between annotators and LLMs of up to 0.68, 0.80, and 0.95 for the emotion classification, medical fact-checking, and hate speech detection tasks respectively.
May 17, 2026cs.LG

Counterfactual Explanations Under Concept Drift

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.
May 17, 2026cs.LG

UNR-Explainer: Counterfactual Explanations for Unsupervised Node Representation Learning Models

Node representation learning, such as Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), has emerged as a pivotal method in machine learning. The demand for reliable explanation generation surges, yet unsupervised models remain underexplored. To bridge this gap, we introduce a method for generating counterfactual (CF) explanations in unsupervised node representation learning. We identify the most important subgraphs that cause a significant change in the k-nearest neighbors of a node of interest in the learned embedding space upon perturbation. The k-nearest neighbor-based CF explanation method provides simple, yet pivotal, information for understanding unsupervised downstream tasks, such as top-k link prediction and clustering. Consequently, we introduce UNR-Explainer for generating expressive CF explanations for Unsupervised Node Representation learning methods based on a Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS). The proposed method demonstrates superior performance on diverse datasets for unsupervised GraphSAGE and DGI.
May 16, 2026cs.CV

Zero-Shot Faithful Textual Explanations via Directional-Derivative Influence on Predictions

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.
May 15, 2026cs.CV

Right Predictions, Misleading Explanations: On the Vulnerability of Vision-Language Model Explanations

Explanation mechanisms are increasingly used to support transparency and trust in vision-language models (VLMs), particularly in settings where model decisions require human oversight. However, the robustness of these explanations remains insufficiently understood. In this work, we investigate whether explanation heatmaps in VLMs, particularly CLIP-based models, faithfully reflect model reasoning under adversarial conditions. We show that explanation maps can be systematically manipulated while preserving the model's original prediction, revealing a disconnect between predictive behavior and explanation faithfulness. To study this vulnerability, we introduce X-Shift, a novel grey-box attack that perturbs patch-level visual representations to redirect explanation heatmaps toward semantically irrelevant regions without altering the predicted output. Unlike conventional adversarial attacks that aim to induce misclassification, X-Shift specifically targets the integrity of the explanation process itself. The attack operates without modifying model parameters and generalizes across multiple CLIP architectures and explanation methods. We evaluate the proposed approach on ImageNet-1k, MS-COCO, and Flickr30K, demonstrating consistent degradation in explanation alignment under imperceptible perturbations while maintaining prediction stability. Furthermore, standard prediction-oriented adversarial attacks fail to reproduce the same explanation-shifting behavior even under substantially larger perturbation budgets. Our findings highlight a fundamental limitation of current explanation mechanisms in VLMs and raise concerns about their use as reliable indicators of model trustworthiness in high-impact applications.
May 15, 2026cs.CV

Segmentation, Detection and Explanation: A Unified Framework for CT Appearance Reasoning

Recent progress in deep learning has significantly advanced CT image analysis, particularly for segmentation tasks. However, these advances are largely confined to image-level pattern recognition, with most methods lacking explicit anatomical or contextual reasoning. Large vision-language models introduce linguistic context into image analysis, yet most approaches typically focus on a single task, which is insufficient for clinical workflow analysis that requires multiple fine-grained types of analysis, such as anatomy detection and segmentation. In this paper, we propose a unified autoregressive framework that integrates language-guided visual reasoning into CT interpretation. Our method introduces task-routing tokens that trigger detection and segmentation heads conditioned on the hidden states of a large vision-language model, enabling coherent generation of visual outputs (e.g., masks and bounding boxes) and textual reasonings. To progressively enhance localisation accuracy and semantic clarity, we further design a "closer-look" mechanism that allows the model to perform progressive coarse-to-fine visits to regions of interest under refined fields of view. To support model training and evaluation, we curated a new multimodal CT dataset containing pixel-wise masks, bounding boxes, spatial prompts, and structured descriptions for visual objects constructed through an AI-assisted annotation process with human verification. Experiments on public benchmarks demonstrate consistent improvements over the SoTA, achieving up to 1.0% Dice on BTCV and 1.7% Dice on MosMed+, while additionally providing appearance reasoning outputs. The code and dataset will be available.
May 14, 2026cs.LG

From Weight Perturbation to Feature Attribution for Explaining Fully Connected Neural Networks

Fully Connected Neural Networks (FCNNs) are often regarded as simple and intuitive architectures, yet they serve as the foundation for more complex models. Nonetheless, the lack of consensus on their interpretability continues to pose challenges, underscoring the enduring relevance of simpler, attribution-based approaches for understanding even the most advanced neural architectures. In this regard, we explore a novel idea for estimating feature attribution, by applying perturbation to the features' attached weights instead of their values. This method offers a fresh perspective aimed at mitigating common limitations in Occlusion techniques, such as Added Bias and Out-of-Distribution data. The application of this rule leads to the formation of a pair of novel attribution methods we call XWP and XWP_c. Founded on simple rules, our methods achieve competitive performance in identifying image signals for simple DNNs, competing with the most established attribution methods on standard baseline metrics. Our work thus contributes to the field of Explainability by introducing a robust framework that paves the way for addressing these long-standing vulnerabilities, and leads to more reliable and interpretable model explanations.
May 13, 2026cs.LG

INSIGHTS: Demonstration-Based Summaries of Time Series Predictors

Explainability methods have progressed rapidly, but global explanations for time-series models remain underdeveloped, with most approaches focusing on local, instance-level attributions. We introduce INSIGHTS, a model-agnostic, user-centric approach for providing global explanations of time series models. Our approach prioritizes simplicity, efficiency, and transparency in its design, ensuring that stakeholders can readily adopt its outputs. While current methods focus on local explanations, INSIGHTS generates sample summaries that offer a comprehensive overview of model behavior. It balances the importance and diversity of time series samples to create informative subsets using utility functions that capture domain-specific aspects of time series behavior, such as exceeding domain norms. We evaluate INSIGHTS through experiments, interviews, and a user study. Our results indicate INSIGHTS effectively constructs comprehensive, diverse time series subsets, producing summaries manageable for individual evaluation. It is preferred by domain experts for its ability to provide a stable understanding of model behavior and the quality of the samples identified. Moreover, user study participants presented with INSIGHTS-based summaries exhibit an enhanced understanding of the model's overall behavior.
May 13, 2026cs.LG

Descriptive Collision in Sparse Autoencoder Auto-Interpretability: When One Explanation Describes Many Features

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are now standard tools for decomposing language model activations into interpretable features, and automated interpretability pipelines routinely assign each feature a short natural-language explanation. Existing critiques of this practice focus on polysemanticity -- one feature with many meanings -- or on whether explanations predict activations. We identify a complementary, structurally distinct problem we call descriptive collision: many distinct SAE features admit the same explanation. Reanalyzing the largest publicly-available dataset of human-annotated SAE features (Marks et al., 2025), comprising 722 annotated features across Gemma 2 2B and Pythia 70M, we find that the mean annotation string is reused across 3.07 features; 82.1% of features share their annotation with at least one other feature; and the single most common annotation string ("plural nouns") labels 101 distinct features spanning 18 layers and four model components. Information-theoretically, the average annotation resolves only 70% of feature identity. We formalize a property called discrimination, prove that current detection-style auto-interpretability scoring is invariant to collision, and propose two complementary corrective metrics -- collision-adjusted detection and discrimination scoring -- that explicitly penalize explanations that fail to distinguish a feature from its neighbors. The collision problem is independent of, and additive with, previously identified failure modes of auto-interpretability; ignoring it inflates reported feature interpretability by a quantity equal to roughly one-third of the bits required to identify a feature.
May 12, 2026cs.LG

AGOP as Explanation: From Feature Learning to Per-Sample Attribution in Image Classifiers

The Average Gradient Outer Product (AGOP) governs feature learning in neural networks: the Neural Feature Ansatz states that weight Gram matrices at each layer align with the corresponding AGOP matrices computed over the training distribution. We ask a complementary question: can this same quantity serve as a post-hoc attribution method for explaining individual predictions? We introduce AGOP-Weighted: a novel attribution method that multiplies the per-sample gradient by sqrt(diag(M) / max diag(M)), a training-distribution prior that suppresses gradient noise and amplifies consistently important pixels -- a combination not present in any prior attribution method. We formalise two companion variants -- AGOP-Local (per-sample gradient, equivalent to VanillaGrad) and AGOP-Global (diag(M) directly as a zero-cost saliency map) -- and implement an efficient training-time accumulation hook; AGOP-Global then requires zero inference cost (disk lookup) while AGOP-Weighted requires only a single gradient pass. We conduct the first rigorous comparison of AGOP attribution against Integrated Gradients (IG), SmoothGrad, GradCAM, and VanillaGrad across two benchmarks with pixel-level ground truth: (i) the synthetic XAI-TRIS benchmark (four classification scenarios, 8x8 images, CNN8by8) and (ii) the photorealistic CLEVR-XAI benchmark (ResNet-18 fine-tuned from ImageNet). AGOP-Weighted achieves 44% higher mIoU than IG on linear tasks; AGOP-Global achieves 7x higher mIoU than IG on multiplicative tasks (where IG falls below random) at zero inference cost. Both findings generalise to ResNet-18 on CLEVR-XAI (+18% and +37% respectively). We further show that GradCAM fails on small-resolution images due to spatial resolution collapse, and that diag(M) quality improves monotonically throughout training even after classification accuracy has plateaued.
May 12, 2026cs.AI

Explaining and Breaking the Safety-Helpfulness Ceiling via Preference Dimensional Expansion

In the realm of multi-objective alignment for large language models, balancing disparate human preferences often manifests as a zero-sum conflict. Specifically, the intrinsic tension between competing goals dictates that aggressively optimizing for one metric (e.g., helpfulness) frequently incurs a substantial penalty on another (e.g., harmlessness). While prior work mainly focuses on data selection, parameter merging, or algorithmic balancing during training, these approaches merely force compromises between divergent preferences along a fixed Pareto frontier, failing to fundamentally resolve the inherent trade-off. In this work, we approach this problem from a novel perspective of multi-dimensional rewards. By scaling up the model's rollouts and analyzing the outputs across different reward dimensions, we arrive at a critical conclusion: the conflict among multiple objectives stems from the fact that the prompt itself inherently restricts the achievable multi-dimensional rewards. Based on this core observation, we propose MORA: Multi-Objective Reward Assimilation. Specifically, MORA isolates single-reward prompts through pre-sampling and expands their reward diversity by rewriting the original questions to incorporate multi-dimensional intents. Extensive experiments demonstrate that: (1) in sequential alignment, MORA achieves single-preference improvements ranging from 5% to 12.4%, with exceptional gains in harmlessness, after multiple-preference alignment across helpful, harmless, and truthful dimensions. (2) In simultaneous alignment, MORA achieves an average overall reward improvement of 4.6%. Our codes are available at https://github.com/Shiying-Huang/MORA-MPA.
May 12, 2026cs.CL

Macro: Enhancing Multilingual Counterfactual Explanations through Alignment-as-Preference Optimization

Self-generated counterfactual explanations (SCEs) are minimally modified inputs (minimality) generated by large language models (LLMs) that flip their own predictions (validity), offering a causally grounded approach to unraveling black-box LLM behavior. Yet extending them beyond English remains challenging: existing methods struggle to produce valid SCEs in non-dominant languages, and a persistent trade-off between validity and minimality undermines explanation quality. We introduce Macro, a preference alignment framework that applies Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) to multilingual SCE generation, using a composite scoring function to construct preference pairs that effectively translate the trade-off into measurable preference signals. Experiments across four LLMs and seven typologically diverse languages show that Macro improves validity by 12.55% on average over the chain-of-thought baseline without degrading minimality, while avoiding the severe minimality violations of the translation-based baseline. Compared to supervised fine-tuning, Macro achieves superior performance on both metrics, confirming that explicit preference optimization is essential for balancing this trade-off. Further analyses reveal that Macro increases cross-lingual perturbation alignment and mitigates common generation errors. Our results highlight preference optimization as a promising direction for enhancing multilingual model explanations.
May 12, 2026cs.LG

A Controlled Counterexample to Strong Proxy-Based Explanations of OOD Performance: in a Fixed Pretraining-and-Probing Setup

Task-agnostic structure proxies are often used to interpret why one pretraining corpus transfers better than another, but such explanations require the proxy to track the structure that matters for the downstream task. We test this requirement in a fixed pretraining-and-probing setup motivated by computationally bounded notions of learned structure, including epiplexity. The core question is whether a proxy ranking of two pretraining datasets must agree with their ranking by OOD probe accuracy. We show that it need not. First, we give a controlled construction in which a formal structure quantity, its operational proxy, and the task-relevant structure for a target family separate. We then instantiate the same mechanism in a synthetic sequence-model experiment: under the primary all-sample evaluation, the OOD accuracy ranking reverses the proxy ranking in two of three seeds, with auxiliary diagnostics and ablations supporting the same interpretation. The counterexample does not reject structure-based explanations in general; it identifies a boundary on strong proxy-based explanations. A proxy for total learned structure can fail to track the task-relevant structure that drives OOD performance, even in a controlled setting.
May 11, 2026cs.CL

RUBEN: Rule-Based Explanations for Retrieval-Augmented LLM Systems

This paper demonstrates RUBEN, an interactive tool for discovering minimal rules to explain the outputs of retrieval-augmented large language models (LLMs) in data-driven applications. We leverage novel pruning strategies to efficiently identify a minimal set of rules that subsume all others. We further demonstrate novel applications of these rules for LLM safety, specifically to test the resiliency of safety training and effectiveness of adversarial prompt injections.
May 11, 2026cs.LG

Causal Explanations from the Geometric Properties of ReLU Neural Networks

Neural networks have proved an effective means of learning control policies for autonomous systems, but these learned policies are difficult to understand due to the black-box nature of neural networks. This lack of interpretability makes safety assurance for such autonomous systems challenging. The fields of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) and eXplainable Reinforcement Learning (XRL) aim to interpret the decision making processes of neural networks and autonomous agents, respectively. In particular, work on causal explanations aims to provide "why" and "why not" explanations for why a model made a given decision. However, most of the work on explainability to date utilises a distilled version of the original model. While this distilled policy is interpretable, it necessarily degrades in performance significantly when compared to the original model, and is not guaranteed to be an accurate reflection of the decision making processes in the original model and as such cannot be used to guarantee its safety. Recent work on understanding the geometry of ReLU neural networks shows that a ReLU network corresponds to a piecewise linear function divided into regions defined by an n-dimensional convex polytope. Through this lens, a neural network can be understood as dividing the input space into distinct regions which apply a single linear function for each output neuron. We show that this geometric representation can be used to generate causal explanations for the network's behaviour similar to previous work, but which extracts rules directly from the geometry of Neural Networks with the ReLU activation function, and is therefore an accurate reflection of the network's behaviour.
May 11, 2026cs.SD

APEX: Audio Prototype EXplanations for Classification Tasks

Explainable AI (XAI) has achieved remarkable success in image classification, yet the audio domain lacks equally mature solutions. Current methods apply vision-based attribution techniques to spectrograms, overlooking fundamental differences between visual and acoustic signals. While prototype reasoning is promising, acoustic similarity remains multidimensional. We introduce APEX (Audio Prototype EXplanations), a post-hoc framework for interpreting pre-trained audio classifiers. Crucially, APEX requires no fine-tuning of the original backbone and strictly preserves output invariance. APEX disentangles explanations into four perspectives: Square-based prototypes to localize transient events, Time-based for temporal patterns, Frequency-based highlighting spectral bands, and Time-Frequency-based integrating both. This yields intuitive, example-based explanations that respect acoustic properties, providing greater semantic clarity than standard gradient-based methods.
May 11, 2026cs.CV

Scaling Vision Models Does Not Consistently Improve Localisation-Based Explanation Quality

Artificial intelligence models are increasingly scaled to improve predictive accuracy, yet it remains unclear whether scale improves the quality of post-hoc explanations. We investigate this relationship by evaluating 11 computer vision models representing increasing levels of depth and complexity within the ResNet, DenseNet, and Vision Transformer families, trained from scratch or pretrained, across three image datasets with ground-truth segmentation masks. For each model, we generate explanations using five post-hoc explainable AI methods and quantify mask alignment using two localisation metrics: Relevance Rank Accuracy (Arras et al., 2022) and the proposed Dual-Polarity Precision, which measures positive attributions inside the class mask and negative attributions outside it. Across datasets and methods, increasing architectural depth and parameter count does not improve explanation quality in most statistical comparisons, and smaller models often match or exceed deeper variants. While pretraining typically improves predictive performance and increases the dependence of explanations on learned weights, it does not consistently increase localisation scores. We also observe scenarios in which models achieve strong predictive performance while localisation precision is near zero, suggesting that performance metrics alone may not indicate whether predictions are based on the annotated regions. These results indicate that larger models do not reliably provide higher-quality explanations, and that explainability should therefore be assessed explicitly during model selection for safety-sensitive deployments.
May 11, 2026cs.AI

Fairness of Explanations in Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Unifying Framework, Axioms, and Future Direction toward Responsible AI

Machine learning algorithms are being used in high-stakes decisions, including those in criminal justice, healthcare, credit, and employment. The research community has responded with two largely independent research fields: \emph{algorithmic fairness}, which targets equitable outcomes, and \emph{explainable AI} (XAI), which targets interpretable reasoning. This survey identifies and maps a novel blind spot at their intersection, which is a model that can satisfy every standard fairness criterion in its outputs while being profoundly unfair in its \emph{reasoning process}. We refer to this as the procedural bias, and mitigating it requires treating the fairness of explanations as a distinct object of scientific study. To our knowledge, we provide the first unified theoretical and literature review of this emerging field and elucidate the drawbacks of post-hoc explainers in certifying explanation fairness. Our central contribution is a \emph{conditional invariance framework} formalizing explanation fairness as the requirement that explanations should be indifferent regardless of the protected attributes P(E(X)∈⋅∣Xrel=xrel, A=a)=P(E(X)∈⋅∣Xrel=xrel, A=b) P(E(X) \in \cdot \mid X_\text{rel} = x_\text{rel},\, A = a) = P(E(X) \in \cdot \mid X_\text{rel} = x_\text{rel},\, A = b) for all task-relevant xx, a single principle from which all existing explanation fairness metrics emerge as partial operationalizations. We introduce a seven-dimensional taxonomy, identify three generative mechanisms of explanation inequity (representation-driven, explanation-model mismatch, actionability-driven), and propose a canonical six-step evaluation workflow for operationalizing explanation fairness audits in practice.
May 10, 2026cs.AI

Attribution-based Explanations for Markov Decision Processes

Attribution techniques explain the outcome of an AI model by assigning a numerical score to its inputs. So far, these techniques have mainly focused on attributing importance to static input features at a single point in time, and thus fail to generalize to sequential decision-making settings. This paper fills this gap by introducing techniques to generate attribution-based explanations for Markov Decision Processes (MDPs). We give a formal characterization of what attributions should represent in MDPs, focusing on explanations that assign importance scores to both individual states and execution paths. We show how importance scores can be computed by leveraging techniques for strategy synthesis, enabling the efficient computation of these scores despite the non-determinism inherent in an MDP. We evaluate our approach on five case-studies, demonstrating its utility in providing interpretable insights into the logic of sequential decision-making agents.
May 9, 2026cs.DB

Detect, Localize, and Explain: Interactive Hierarchical Log Anomaly Analytics with LLM Augmentation

Logs are ubiquitous in modern systems. Unfortunately, their unstructured nature in flat sequences limits understanding of execution behaviors, hindering effective anomaly diagnosis. To address this, Krone introduces a novel hierarchical log abstraction that transforms flat log sequences into semantically coherent units across entity, action, and status levels. Building on this abstraction, Krone introduces a hierarchical orchestration framework that decomposes flat log sequences into hierarchical execution units and performs modular detection over them. It executes and optimizes the modular detection tasks across levels, enabling precise anomaly detection, localization, and explanation with selective invocation of LLM-based reasoning. In this work, we present Krone-viz, an interactive visualization system based on Krone, which makes hierarchical log analysis interpretable and actionable for software engineers and system operators. Demonstrated on the widely used HDFS benchmark dataset, Krone-viz supports: 1) examining hierarchical decompositions of flat log sequences, 2) inspecting detection results and abnormal segments identified by Krone with LLM-generated explanations, and 3) reusing, reviewing, and revising knowledge generated by LLMs with human-in-the-loop guardrails. The code of Krone-viz is available at https://github.com/LeiMa0324/KRONE_Demo_official, and we deploy a live demo at https://leima0324.github.io/KRONE_Demo_official.
May 9, 2026cs.AI

Reconciling Consistency-Based Diagnosis with Actual-Causality-Based Explanations

We establish, from the point of view of Explainable AI (XAI), connections between Consistency-Based Diagnosis (CBD), on one side, and Actual Causality and Causal Responsibility, on the other. CBD has received little attention from the XAI community. Connections between these two areas could have a fruitful impact on XAI and Explainable Data Management.
May 9, 2026cs.HC

Causal Stories from Sensor Traces: Auditing Epistemic Overreach in LLM-Generated Personal Sensing Explanations

LLMs are increasingly used to explain personal sensing data, translating traces of activity and mood into natural-language accounts of why an anomalous day may have occurred. However, such explanations can sound coherent and personally meaningful even when the underlying evidence is sparse or missing. We introduce epistemic overreach (EO) as a measure for cases where a generated explanation implies more than the available sensing evidence can justify. To audit how often and in what forms EO occurs, we obtained anomalous-day scenarios from three longitudinal sensing datasets of college students: StudentLife, GLOBEM, and CollegeExperience. Across activity, sleep, and affect anomalies, we generated 14,922 explanations using three LLM families -- Llama, Qwen, and GPT -- under two prompting conditions: one minimally constrained prompt and another prompt explicitly instructing models to bound claims to the data. For each scenario, we varied the amount of behavioral evidence available to the model to examine whether more evidence reduces EO. We evaluated each explanation using a structured rubric, decomposing EO into the dimensions of unsupported causal attribution, unacknowledged data gaps, overconfident language, temporal inconsistency, and diagnostic inference. We find that LLMs routinely attribute anomalous days to causes without sufficient support from the data, and that this pattern replicates across datasets, anomaly types, and model families. Further, providing richer context does not reliably reduce EO; bounded prompting helps but does not eliminate it. These findings suggest that evidential grounding should be a first-order evaluation criterion for LLM-generated personal sensing explanations, alongside fluency and plausibility. We argue that personal sensing explanations require evidential discipline: systems must distinguish what is observed, what is inferred, and what remains unknown.
May 8, 2026cs.CL

Effective Explanations Support Planning Under Uncertainty

Explaining how to get from A to B can be challenging. It requires mentally simulating what the listener will do based on what they are told. To capture this process, we propose a computational model that converts utterances into action plans: a large language model translates an explanation into program-like guidance (a policy prior and value map), and a planning agent executes it under partial observability. We score explanations by the efficiency and reliability of the resulting paths, penalizing replanning. Across four preregistered experiments, we collect a corpus of 1,200 explanations over 24 maps, elicit helpfulness judgments, measure baseline navigation, and test behavior with explanations of differing quality. Higher-scored explanations are judged more helpful and improve navigation: participants with explanations outperform those without, and high-scoring explanations help more than low-scoring ones. Together, these results show procedural explanation as utility-guided communication shaped by how language can be grounded into action under uncertainty.
May 8, 2026q-bio.MN

Graph neural network explanations reveal a topological signature of disease-associated hubs in biological networks

Graph neural networks (GNNs) are increasingly used to model biological systems, yet the reliability of post-hoc explanation methods for recovering meaningful molecular mechanisms remains unclear. Here, we systematically evaluate four widely used approaches: Saliency Attribution (SA), Integrated Gradients (IG), GNNExplainer, and Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP) for identifying disease-relevant structure in breast cancer RNA-seq data projected onto a protein-protein interaction network. Using synthetic benchmarks with known ground-truth motifs, we show that explanation methods recover distinct signal organizations: SA performs best for sparse single-node drivers, whereas IG and LRP preferentially recover distributed pathway-like and cascade-like signals. In TCGA BRCA data, we identify a consistent topological signature of disease-associated hubs in which attribution peaks in the immediate 1-hop neighborhood and decays across successive network shells, a pattern most pronounced for IG and LRP and associated with strong enrichment of known cancer hubs. We further observe a trade-off between local hub enrichment and global gene ranking performance, with IG optimizing local enrichment and SA achieving superior global discrimination. Motivated by these complementary behaviors, we introduce a framework combining a shell-based hub score with consensus ranking across explainers. Consensus scores improve prioritization of canonical cancer genes (TP53, BRCA1, ESR1, MYC), reduce dependence on node degree, and, especially when tuned, outperform individual methods. Pathway enrichment further reveals improved recovery of biologically coherent cancer programs, including ERBB2, RTK, MAPK, immune, and cytokine signaling. Together, these results demonstrate that topology-aware integration of graph explanations can improve biological interpretability and biologically relevant molecular recovery.
May 8, 2026cs.LG

Why Self-Inconsistency Arises in GNN Explanations and How to Exploit It

Recent work has observed that explanations produced by Self-Interpretable Graph Neural Networks (SI-GNNs) can be self-inconsistent: when the model is reapplied to its own explanatory graph subset, it may produce a different explanation. However, why self-inconsistency arises remains poorly understood. In this work, we first identify re-explanation-induced context perturbation as the direct cause of score variation. We then introduce a latent signal assignment hypothesis to explain why only some edges are sensitive to this perturbation, and analyze how conciseness regularization affects latent signal assignment. Given that self-inconsistent edges do not provide stable evidence for the model's prediction, we propose Self-Denoising (SD), a model-agnostic and training-free post-processing strategy that calibrates explanations with only one additional forward pass. Experiments across representative SI-GNN frameworks, backbone architectures, and benchmark datasets support our hypothesis and show that SD consistently improves explanation quality while adding only about 4--6% computational overhead in practice.