Xai

Modern evaluation of learning pipelines often reduces to downstream accuracy, leaving open the question of why tasks succeed or fail. TriProbe addresses this gap with a multi-level probing framework for explainable diagnosis of task separability. Rather than treating models as black boxes, TriProbe traces how separability evolves across inputs, learned features, and final classifiers. It decomposes multi-task problems into binary subtasks and applies three complementary probes: a Foundational Probe on input spaces, a Latent Probe on feature representations, and a Final Probe on classifier outputs. Using Maximum Fisher's Discriminant Ratio as a principled separability metric, TriProbe identifies bottlenecks and affected task pairs. Experiments on the Roshambo sEMG benchmark show how TriProbe reveals hidden breakdowns, guiding data collection, validation, and architecture design.

Energy consumption forecasting relies on increasingly complex machine learning (ML) models, such as Genetic Programming-based symbolic regressors, whose predictions can be difficult for facility managers and building operators to interpret. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques address this opacity, but traditional XAI dashboards require substantial technical expertise and provide limited flexibility for dynamic, context-aware inquiry. Conversational XAI systems offer a promising alternative; however, previous approaches, such as TalkToModel, were constrained by rigid custom grammars and achieved only 76.8% intent-parsing accuracy. This paper introduces the Explainability Assistant, an open-source conversational XAI system that leverages the function-calling capabilities of modern Large Language Models (LLMs) to overcome these limitations. The system achieves 94% intent-parsing accuracy, supports flexible natural language interaction, and adapts to different ML problem types without task-specific fine-tuning. We present the system's architecture and report results from a comparative evaluation conducted with energy domain specialists, contrasting the Explainability Assistant with a traditional XAI dashboard. The evaluation suggests improved usability and consistent task accuracy, with all experts unanimously preferring the conversational interface for practical use.

Deep learning models, notably Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), have demonstrated promising performance in channel estimation for high-mobility vehicular environments. However, their black-box nature and architectural overhead limit trustworthiness and efficiency. Classical explainable AI (XAI) methods rely on costly iterative processes, offering only input-level filtering without addressing architectural fine-tuning. To overcome these limitations, this paper proposes the XAI-assisted Recurrent neural network Attribution for Channel Estimation (X-RACE) framework. X-RACE uses a low-complexity, one-shot dual-optimization strategy to simultaneously evaluate and prune irrelevant input subcarriers and internal hidden units. Furthermore, we propose novel temporal XAI metrics: Saturation Time, Importance Drift, and Relevance Contrast to characterize the LSTM's learning dynamics and memory convergence. Extensive simulations demonstrate that X-RACE reduces inference complexity by at least 44.1% while improving or preserving Bit Error Rate (BER) performance, outperforming classical XAI schemes.

Evaluating the quality of explanations produced by explainable AI (XAI) methods remains challenging because existing approaches often rely on subjective human judgment, limiting reproducibility, scalability, and comparability between studies. We examine whether LLMs can serve as a reproducible and scalable mechanism to make comparative assessments of the quality of XAI explanations. We introduce XAI-Arena, an LLM-as-a-judge framework for scalable, reproducible, multidimensional, and stakeholder-sensitive evaluation of XAI explanation quality. XAI-Arena then allows us to compare XAI explanations along various dimensions, namely, perceived simplicity, clarity, task adequacy, trust calibration, actionability, transparency, faithfulness, and overall interpretability. We then benchmark XAI explanation methods across various datasets, machine learning models, and stakeholder personas. Human validation shows a strong positive association between LLM-generated and human ratings (Spearman's rho=.693, p<.001). Together, LLM-based evaluations can capture systematic differences in XAI explanation quality and provide a scalable and reproducible framework for comparative assessment of XAI explanations.

We observe a phenomenon that current algorithmic research in the field of explainable artificial intelligence primarily pursues better performance on several proxy metrics. On the one hand, these proxy metrics themselves are more or less flawed and cannot properly measure the quality of methods. On the other hand, metric-oriented research approaches often lead to the neglect of the rationality and interpretability of the methods themselves. Explainable artificial intelligence is abbreviated as XAI. The metric-driven research paradigm has resulted in a lack of interpretability of the relevant XAI methods themselves. Accordingly, there is a need for interpretability research on XAI methods, which can be playfully referred to as XXAI. This paper is one of our works on XXAI. This paper takes Generic Attention-model Explainability (GAE), a widely influential model interpretation method , or rather, XAI method that represents an important technical route, as the research object, and explores the real working mechanism and flaws of this method as well as the technical route it represents. Based on the conclusions of this study, it may be necessary to re-examine or verify GAE-related methods and their domain applications. We argue that GAE is an interpretation method that focuses on the attention process. After pointing out the working mechanism and flaws of GAE, we propose Cumulative Asset Holdings (CAH), a more reasonable Transformer interpretation method integrating both process-based and feature-based ideas from an economic zero-sum games perspective. In addition, it is worth noting that our method is applicable to models with special tokens, where existing methods may suffer from limitations. The model simplification research method and the analysis of additive operations adopted in this study may provide inspiration for other research works in XAI.

Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) increasingly calls for actionable counterfactual recourse, yet current methodologies face challenges related to causal invalidity, excessive cognitive burden, and predictive failure. Exhaustive causal search algorithms often require modifications to multiple attributes, whereas additive attribution-guided methods, such as SHAP, ignore higher-order feature synergies, leading to suboptimal predictive momentum and diffuse intervention effort in complex nonlinear models, such as XGBoost. To bridge this gap, we introduce actionable case-based feature importance (A-CBFI), a diagnosis-prescription integrated framework for tabular machine learning. Grounded in structural causal models (SCMs), A-CBFI isolates synergistic interaction bottlenecks and releases suppressive structural locks, translating them into targeted interventions. By mathematically separating the active user intervention space (L_{\mathrm{active}}) from downstream effects and concentrating over 98.3% of the intervention effort on diagnosed root causes, A-CBFI enables highly targeted interventions. Empirical evaluations across the financial and healthcare domains demonstrate that A-CBFI reduces the active human intervention burden by 77.0% while maintaining comparable global recourse cost to exhaustive causal baselines. By prioritizing the diagnosed causal bottlenecks, A-CBFI provides targeted and actionable recourse while maintaining causal validity and achieving full relative convergence across all causally feasible instances.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a powerful approach to solving complex problems in critical domains. Many concerns arise regarding the decision-making process of its models, mainly due to deep neural networks outperforming their peers at the cost of ambiguity in feature extraction and prediction. Consequently, in critical domains such as remote sensing, where high-resolution imagery must be analyzed using black-box models, the lack of transparency limits trust in these models and, thus, their adoption. In light of this reality, explaining and understanding the complex decision-making process of AI models has become essential. Explainable AI (XAI) aims to bridge this gap by providing insights into how and why certain decisions are made. While significant progress has been achieved in explaining image classification tasks, image segmentation still offers considerable room for improvement. In this context, this paper proposes an entropy-centric XAI method for semantic segmentation. Moreover, a new XAI evaluation methodology is proposed to efficiently measure the relevance of the regions highlighted by the proposed XAI method. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of the proposed XAI method compared with recently adapted XAI methods for semantic segmentation.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) seeks to explain how an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system arrived at a particular decision. We propose ''Rule of Thumb'' (RoT) explanations, a new approach to XAI based upon a novel formulation that identifies the most relevant features for predicting the behaviour of an AI system, for a particular datapoint. We show how RoT is well-suited to enable XAI in: (a) zero-shot classification using large language models (LLMs), (b) auditing of opaque AI systems without model access, and (c) the use of AI in scientific discovery. Additionally, RoT meets specific requirements from leading AI regulations, provides a familiar interface and visualisations for XAI practitioners, is model-agnostic, and is substantially faster than alternatives. Code available at: https://github.com/KaiRawal/Rule-of-Thumb-Explaining-Artificial-Intelligence-Systems-using-Partial-Information

Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based prospective anomaly detection methods are increasingly deployed in high-dimensional and nonlinear settings. Among these approaches, AI-based statistical process monitoring (SPM) is widely used, providing a structured framework for prospective monitoring. Once an anomaly is detected, a diagnosis method is needed to identify the features driving the flagged observation away from normal behaviour. Traditional SPM diagnosis methods are typically designed for specific detection models and cannot be directly applied to AI-based methods. Model-agnostic explainable AI (XAI) offers a general framework for feature relevance explanation. However, existing methods suffer from scalability limitations or assign relevance to noise features, reducing diagnosis accuracy. We propose a scalable, baseline-referenced diagnosis method that uses both the anomalous observation and normal baseline information. We provide mathematical guarantees that under a mean-shift anomaly setting, the proposed method achieves higher faithfulness in detecting the features causing the anomaly compared to LIME. Simulation studies and a real-world case study validate the effectiveness of the proposed method and show that it generates more faithful and accurate diagnosis results for AI-based prospective anomaly detection methods.

Edge Artificial Intelligence (Edge AI) enables the deployment of AI models directly on local edge devices, while such deployments are subject to strict resource constraints, particularly in clinical applications requiring local and timely inference. In such contexts, explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) can serve as a human-AI interface intended to support healthcare professionals' and patients' understanding of model predictions and informed decision-making. To fulfill this role, XAI method selection for TinyML deployments can be formulated as a human-centered multi-objective design problem that jointly considers qualitative stakeholder preferences, explanation quality, and proxy-based deployment cost. We propose a framework that integrates a large language model (LLM)-guided design interface that maps qualitative stakeholder preferences to candidate XAI methods, followed by deterministic feasibility filtering and Pareto-based optimization. The framework exposes trade-offs among explanation fidelity, stability, and proxy-based deployment cost while characterizing their implications for explanation quality and estimated deployment feasibility. A proof-of-concept evaluation on a skin lesion classification task illustrates how the framework systematically compares candidate XAI methods and identifies Pareto-efficient trade-offs. The present evaluation covers the computational selection stages, while physical MCU deployment and empirical human-expert validation remain outside the scope of this study.

The 15-minute city promotes access to everyday services within a short walk or bicycle ride, but its relationship with observed mobility remains difficult to quantify. We investigate this relationship in the Paris metropolitan area using mobility trajectories from the NetMob 2025 Data Challenge, enriched with INSEE sociodemographic data and OpenStreetMap points of interest (POIs), yielding approximately 70,000 trip segments after stop-based segmentation and data cleaning. We construct walking- and cycling-based indicators of local service availability and examine their associations with trip duration, transport mode, and short-trip car use. Higher POI availability is associated with less private motorized travel and more active mobility, although this relationship is substantially weaker in the outer agglomeration. Gradient-boosted tree models interpreted with explainable machine-learning methods consistently identify trip purpose, home--work distance, local service availability, vehicle ownership, public-transport subscription, and sociodemographic context as important predictors. For short trips, high POI density is associated with lower car use, while car ownership and driving-licence availability are associated with higher predicted car use; where services are sparse, public-transport subscription is associated with lower predicted car dependence. Finally, explainable AI (XAI) methods are used to examine how feature attributions change under alternative assumed variable orderings. The results are consistent with central assumptions of the 15-minute city while revealing substantial spatial and demographic heterogeneity. They also demonstrate how explainable machine-learning methods can complement accessibility indicators and identify locally relevant hypotheses for urban-mobility policy.

Eliciting explainable AI (XAI) requirements from stroke survivors presents a methodological challenge with direct implications for the design of trustworthy brain-computer interfaces for rehabilitation. How can patients and caregivers articulate preferences about algorithmic transparency when they lack conceptual frameworks for explainability, and when standard elicitation approaches are structurally inadequate for users with acquired communication disorders? We present a video-based scaffolding protocol for XAI requirements elicitation, developed and piloted in a rehabilitation context. In a formative study with three stroke survivors (two with moderate-to-severe aphasia) and three caregivers, facilitators employed four scaffolding approaches alongside the videos: 1) analogical bridging mapping AI states to familiar systems, 2) projective personas depersonalising sensitive topics, 3) binary forcing reducing cognitive load, and 4) extended response time. These approaches successfully surfaced heterogeneous, sometimes conflicting XAI needs across participants. Reflexive analysis additionally revealed three systematic facilitation biases, namely, normative bias, hypothesis confirmation bias, and presence effect, where scaffolding inadvertently shaped responses. We present these as protocol risk guidelines for practitioners. Together, the protocol and guidelines constitute a reusable methodological contribution for eliciting patient-facing XAI requirements in rehabilitation, arguing that such elicitation is a necessary prerequisite for trustworthy human-machine systems design, not an optional preliminary.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The wide use of Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) in numerous domains and real-world classification applications is justified by their high precision and automation speed, helping users concentrate on higher-expertise tasks. To better understand the models and avoid bias during deployment, eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques can be used after training. But as the list of XAI solutions expand, comparisons between them diverge, and consensus over their evaluation cannot be reached. This paper proposes a variation of Fidelity-based XAI metrics, with a focus on real-conditions applications, where the number of classes is often low. The approach generates in-distribution, uncertainty-provoking perturbations, to ensure proper measurement of the XAI methods faithfulness. As demonstration of the evaluation framework usefulness, it is compared with human-centric object localization and segmentation metrics. Once applied to both medical and natural imaging applications, it highlights the intricate correlation between domain, data curation, and XAI solution choices in order to validate training of a new CNN model.

Training safe Reinforcement Learning (RL) systems is inherently challenging, with no guarantee of avoiding unwanted behaviors. The most effective defenses against this are (i) transparency through explainability and (ii) alignment via human feedback. While both show promising results, no publicly available framework currently combines them. To address this, we introduce Themis, an XAI-enabled testing and evaluation framework for Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback. Themis supports over 200 widely used environments and is easily configurable for experiments in RL, transparency, and alignment. Our results show that Themis can train reward models that match or outperform the environment's true reward signal using human preferences. We also provide a cloud-based platform for collecting human feedback and managing experiments. It is user-friendly, auto-scalable, and supports large participant groups across multiple experiments without extra development overhead. Tests show Themis can support one thousand users in back-to-back experiments on a modest commercial machine.

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

One of the significant mental health issues affecting female sex workers (FSWs) is mental disorders, especially depression. Exposure to violence, stigma, and economic hardship further increases their psychological risk. Current machine learning (ML) models are typically ineffective at capturing the high-dimensional and complex risk patterns that exist in this marginalized group. This paper suggests a hybrid predictive model that merges an ensemble feature selection strategy using ANOVA and mutual information and Harris Hawks optimization-tuned logistic regression and represents a new application of swarm intelligence to predict mental health in vulnerable groups. The explainable AI (XAI) methods can be used to understand the factors of trauma associated with model predictions. When applied to a group of 3,005 FSWs, it can be seen that the proposed model is more effective than traditional classifiers, with an accuracy of 95.78%, an F1 score of 95.77%, and an AUC of 0.96, and identifying post-traumatic stress, client-related violence, and occupational factors as major contributors to depression. This work bridges the gaps between conventional and ML approaches to develop an XAI tool that enables vulnerable groups to receive early assistance, evidence-based targeted psychosocial care, and health planning.

Explanation requires ground truth: to verify an account of a system we must know its inner functioning-just what is missing where explainable AI (XAI) is most needed. Systems we can study fall into two camps. Simple, procedural one-decision trees, rule lists, sparse linear models-have a known but trivial mechanism, so explaining them tests nothing; genuinely complex ones-deep networks, real-world tasks-need XAI but have no ground-truth inner functioning, so an explanation can be plausible, confident, and wrong with no way to tell. We remove this dichotomy with a study object both genuinely complex and fully specified-inspectable by construction-and, so gradient methods apply, fully differentiable. We reimplement the Atari 2600 Video Computer System (VCS)-a real computer architecture, and the cradle of deep reinforcement learning-as two independent end-to-end differentiable emulators in Julia (jutari) and JAX (jaxtari), each validated bit-for-bit against xitari. Both reproduce xitari on all 64 supported Arcade Learning Environment (ALE) games: 64/64 byte-identical RAM and 64/64 pixel-identical screens. Treating the cartridge ROM as a weight tensor, RAM as a soft tape, and control flow as gates, we prove the differentiable (soft) execution equals the original (hard) one bit-for-bit in the forward pass at any finite temperature, while exposing surrogate gradients where the bit logic has none. The JAX port also opens a GPU path: batched differentiable rollouts reach millions of environment-steps/s on one commodity GPU. The system was built in roughly 137 active hours over 29 calendar days, much of it written autonomously by coding agents. This paper builds and validates the foundation, showing-theoretically and in a qualitative gradient study-that gradient-based XAI on it is feasible. Both ports' full code is available under the MIT license at https://github.com/akmaier/UnderstandingVCS.

Solar flares, particularly those of the M- and X-class, have a significant impact on human life because of their potential to disrupt critical infrastructure and communication systems on Earth. Accurate prediction of solar flares is crucial for mitigating these risks, but the black-box nature of conventional deep learning models used in flare prediction limits their trustworthiness and interpretability. In this paper, we propose a new approach to solar flare prediction using photospheric magnetic field parameters or features with deep learning. To improve model interpretability, we integrate explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques, including SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and partial dependence plots (PDPs), into our prediction framework. XAI methods provide transparency by analyzing the importance and interactions of features used by our model. Specifically, SHAP values offer a global and local understanding of the features, while PDPs provide insights into feature-level trends. These techniques demonstrate the potential of XAI in deploying AI-driven solutions in high-impact applications such as solar flare prediction, paving the way for more informed decision-making in solar physics and space weather studies.

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

Stage B heart failure is characterized by asymptomatic structural or functional cardiac abnormalities. Identifying individuals at this stage is clinically important, as early detection may enable targeted interventions to prevent progression to symptomatic disease. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) may support early detection, transparent risk stratification, and selection of clinically actionable interventions. This review examines the use of XAI in detecting and characterizing stage B heart failure. A literature search of Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed was conducted on 27 March 2026. Studies were included if they applied AI with XAI techniques to stage B heart failure. After screening, 20 studies were included. Data on modalities, outcomes, demographic reporting, and XAI methods were extracted and synthesized. SHAP was the most commonly used method, followed by LIME, saliency maps, and Grad-CAM; however, XAI adoption was inconsistent, with some studies relying on limited or ad hoc interpretability approaches. Notably, none compared explanations across sex or ethnic subgroups, despite evidence of subgroup differences in disease burden. Evaluation of XAI outputs was often insufficient: some studies did not assess explanations, while others relied only on literature-based comparisons, introducing potential bias. These limitations suggest explainability was not systematically validated or leveraged to support robust and fair clinical inference. XAI shows promise for improving transparency in stage B heart failure identification, but current implementations remain limited. Key gaps include limited consideration of sex and ethnicity, absence of subgroup-specific analyses, inconsistent evaluation, and lack of external validation, all of which constrain generalisability and clinical adoption.

Electricity markets are inherently complex systems characterised by strong nonlinearities, high-dimensional interactions, and increasing interdependence across regions. While deep neural networks (DNNs) have demonstrated strong predictive capabilities for electricity prices, their lack of interpretability limits their usefulness for understanding the underlying drivers of price formation. This paper addresses this gap by combining DNN models with explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques to analyse the determinants of electricity prices across 39 European bidding zones. We employ SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) to quantify feature contributions and apply and extend SSHAP, an aggregation framework to improve interpretability in high-dimensional settings. The analysis identifies that renewable energy sources, particularly solar, play a disproportionately important role in price formation despite their lower share in total power generation. Gas prices remain a dominant and consistent driver across electricity markets, while interconnections significantly shape price dynamics, highlighting the strong interdependence of European electricity systems. In addition, a synthetic EU-wide electricity market is constructed to explore the counterfactual scenario of a fully integrated market with a single price.

The noise of Magnetic Resonance Imaging MRI poses challenges for Deep Learning DL when tumor boundaries are obscured tumor location and appearance are complex Therefore we develop BrainFusionNet that combines Convolutional Neural Networks CNNs Vision Transformers ViT and Gated Recurrent Units GRUs to extract spatial contextual and sequential features from MRI images for improved brain tumor classification Furthermore explainable AI such as SHAP LIME and GradCAM are integrated to visualise and highlight image regions that contribute to BrainFusionNets decisionmaking process The proposed BrainFusionNet model is evaluated on two publicly available MRI datasets Kfold validation suggests 98 accuracy on both datasets The model was compared with the six stateoftheart SOTA CNNs and transfer learning Among the SOTA CNNs DenseNet121 and VGG16 achieved the highest accuracy of 96 The novelty of BrainFusionNet is that the hybrid model effectively extracts local and global features from MRI images even in smallscale tumor regions and small tumor sizes The model has a balanced sequential CNN architecture to capture lowlevel and deeperlayer features a customized ViT that captures local features stabilizes gradient flow and reduces the risk of vanishing gradients during MRI image training The CNN and ViT outputs are fed into a GRU for final classification Furthermore we analyze pixel intensities to determine whether MRI image quality affects image classification Our findings are very novel in image interpretation as we found that the distribution of pixel intensities in MRI images affects DL performance

Saliency map visualizations explain image-based AI predictions by pointing to regions, but these are often unintuitive and semantically unclear, leaving an interpretability gap. We argue that AI explanations should be intuitive -- coherent to user knowledge, yet simple and selective to accelerate interpretation. Inspired by artistic drawings, we propose SketchXplain to generate sketch-based visual explanations for intuitive image-based explainable AI (XAI). Combining techniques in saliency maps, concept-bottleneck models, and sketch optimization, SketchXplain integrates saliency to select coherent observation artifacts, concepts for knowledge coherence, cues to represent them, and abstraction for simplicity. Evaluating on face expression recognition, modeling and user studies showed that SketchXplain supported quicker interpretation with more aligned visualizations than saliency maps or simple drawings. Further evaluation on skin lesion diagnosis found that SketchXplain more coherently visualized disease symptoms, better supporting lay diagnosis. Thus, this work illustrates the value of sketches for intuitive, simple, coherent, and quick image-based XAI visualizations.

Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a key paradigm for privacy-preserving collaborative model training across distributed and heterogeneous data sources. By keeping raw data local, FL addresses data confidentiality concerns, yet it does not resolve the opacity of modern machine learning models. In parallel, Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has gained attention for improving transparency, trust, and accountability, particularly in high-stakes domains. Their intersection has given rise to Federated Explainable Artificial Intelligence (FedXAI) paradigm, which aims to jointly satisfy privacy and explainability requirements. This survey provides a systematic review of FedXAI, highlighting the transition of explainability from a post-hoc tool to an integral component of the FL lifecycle. We show how explainability supports aggregation, personalization, robustness, coordination, and system-level decision making. To organize the literature, we introduce a taxonomy that classifies FedXAI methods by the role of explainability, model and explainer types, explanation scope, integration level, FL settings, and data heterogeneity. We review approaches ranging from model-agnostic explanations to interpretable federated models and explainability-aware aggregation mechanisms. We also examine evaluation practices and discuss the lack of standardized benchmarks and metrics for measuring explanation quality, stability, privacy leakage, and computational overhead. Finally, we identify key challenges, including explainability under non-IID data, explanation-centric security threats, communication-efficient XAI, continual FedXAI, and the integration of domain knowledge and regulatory constraints. By consolidating existing work and identifying key gaps, this survey serves as a reference framework for designing trustworthy, transparent, and privacy-preserving federated AI systems.

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

Remote photoplethysmography (rPPG) transformers achieve low heart-rate error on benchmarks, yet their decisions remain opaque--a growing concern as rPPG moves toward clinical heart rate estimation. Existing rPPG XAI is dominated by qualitative heatmap inspection without quantitative faithfulness metrics or physiology-grounded validation, leaving a gap between visual plausibility and auditable evidence. We address this gap. First, we adapt four attribution methods (raw attention, rollout, flow, Beyond Intuition) to RhythmFormer's bi-level routing attention with top-$k$ selection. Second, we introduce a skin coverage metric quantifying how much attribution mass falls on skin regions. Third, we adapt the SaCo faithfulness coefficient from its original classification setting to rPPG regression by using the MAE between original and perturbed predicted rPPG waveforms as the perturbation impact. Applying these tools, we quantify a multi-hop leakage effect under sparse top-$k$ routing: attention rollout and flow almost completely restores the connections that individual refined-attention layers explicitly set to zero. Beyond Intuition mitigates this via its value-projection-weighted rollout and gradient-supported mask, attaining the highest median refined skin coverage ($0.83$ vs. $0.57$ for vanilla rollout) and faithfulness ($F=0.92$) among the evaluated methods on UBFC-rPPG. Validation across diverse datasets and model variants is needed. A case study on a low-SaCo outlier further shows all four methods recovering consistently once an artefactual region is replaced, suggesting consistent SaCo behavior across attribution families in this illustrative case. Together, these metrics move XAI for rPPG toward auditable numerical evidence about spatial alignment and perturbation faithfulness, i.e. trustworthy rPPG XAI.

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

The increasing penetrations of the critical infrastructure sector in the United States with intelligent digital technologies have greatly increased exposure to advanced cyber adversaries and operational vulnerabilities. AI-powered governance and automated decision-making systems are becoming a key part of the operation of critical infrastructure systems, including energy, healthcare, transportation, financial services, and communication infrastructure, in order to improve efficiency and strategic management. The growing cyber threat environment, such as Distributed Denial of Service (DDos) attacks, botnets, ransomware, and Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) pose significant challenges to infrastructure resilience, cyber security reliability, and governance trustworthiness. In a changing attack landscape and dynamic network environment, traditional cybersecurity mechanisms can often fall short of meeting the evolving needs and protecting critical systems. This study will develop a resilient cyber risk analytics and model reliability assessment framework to support intelligent governance and decision support for cyber risk exposure in the U.S. critical infrastructure environment. This study is based on the CICIDS2017 dataset for the development and testing of intrusion detection system models and cyber risk prediction models based on machine learning. Various classifiers like XGBoost, Random Forest, and Decision Tree are used to detect malicious activities on the network and determine the level of cyber risk. Furthermore, the Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques are integrated to enhance transparency, interpretability, and trust in cybersecurity decision-making processes. The proposed framework presents the reliability and resilience of the model by having various performance measures such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, ROC-AUC, and false positive rate.

Safety standards for ML-based autonomous driving specify the kind of evidence an assurance case must contain (directed cause-and-effect chains, quantified interventional effects, named root-cause variables), yet the XAI literature is organised by output type and technique family (saliency maps, feature attribution, counterfactuals, causal graphs, language traces). SHAP, the most-recommended ADS XAI method, returns a ranked feature list that no implementation effort can convert into a directed chain (Fig.1). We name this mismatch the evidence-type gap. From AMLAS, ISO 26262, ISO21448, ISO/PAS 8800 we derive 19 testable evidentiary criteria across 7 lifecycle stages with representative clause-cited derivations and score six XAI method classes structurally. Causal XAI emerges as structurally required to satisfy the derived criteria at three stages: hazard identification (+62% rubric gap), incident investigation (+50%), and data management (+50%); the verdict set is stable across thresholds T in (0%, 50%]$ and survives a worst-case single-cell flip down to T = 25%. At the remaining four stages, correlational or language-based methods are comparable or sufficient. The rubric identifies structural admissibility (necessary but not sufficient for compliance): an admissible method's specific output content may still be wrong, and validating that fidelity (the edges a fitted SCM produces, the cause a trace names) is the open assurance challenge. A single-VLA proof of concept on 1,996 real-world driving clips (79,840 rows, ten splits) is consistent with each method's observed output type matching its rubric prediction. XAI method selection for ADS safety assurance should be driven by lifecycle-stage evidence demand, not by method popularity.

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

Explainable AI (XAI) helps users interpret model behavior and identify potential faults. Agentic XAI systems use Large Language Models (LLMs) to make explanations more accessible through natural-language interaction, but they can also produce plausible yet unfaithful explanations. This risk arises because unreliable XAI outputs for complex models can be amplified by LLMs and mislead users. We propose Faithful Agentic XAI (FAX), a framework that improves explanation faithfulness through explicit verification. FAX decomposes draft explanations into claims and cross-checks them against inherently faithful tools, filtering unsupported or contradictory claims before final generation. We also introduce CRAFTER-XAI-Bench, an open-world reinforcement learning benchmark with complex policies, diverse goals, and challenging scenarios for assessing model-specific faithfulness. On CRAFTER-XAI-Bench, FAX improves simulation faithfulness from 0.20 for the strongest baseline to 0.46 while maintaining high informativeness, relevance, and fluency. On three tabular benchmarks, FAX performs competitively with prior Agentic XAI baselines, but our analysis shows that these settings can conflate task accuracy with model-specific faithfulness. These findings show that explicit verification is essential for faithful Agentic XAI and that that faithfulness benchmarks must be designed to test explanations against the behavior of the target model itself.

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.

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

Explainable AI (XAI) techniques aim to provide insights into predictive models and enhance user performance, yet they often fall short of these expectations. Conversational XAI assistants promise to overcome such limitations, but empirical evidence on their impact on objective performance measures remains limited. We propose an experimental design for evaluating explanation assistance through prediction accuracy, model understanding, and error identification. Using an explainable-by-design prediction model, we create conditions where users can outperform the model by identifying and compensating for systematic errors. We compare conversational assistance against Q&A-based assistance to assess which better supports users in working with model explanations. Preliminary results from testing our experimental design show that participants (N=42) in both treatments significantly outperformed the model but reveal no performance differences between assistance types and modest engagement overall. These findings inform refinements for our planned full study, including enhanced engagement interventions and investigation of the mechanisms driving improved predictions.

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

Deep learning has enabled ECG diagnostic models with strong performance in tasks such as arrhythmia classification and abnormality detection. However, accuracy alone is insufficient for clinical deployment because it does not explain why a specific output was produced, limiting justification, error analysis, and trust. Although ECG XAI has been extensively investigated and steadily improved, practical pipelines and reporting conventions vary across studies, hindering reuse and reproducibility. To address these issues, we present Explainable AI framework for ECG models (ExECG), a Python framework that provides a three-stage pipeline: Wrapper standardizes access across heterogeneous ECG formats and intermediate representations, Explainer unifies diverse XAI methods under a shared execution protocol, and Visualizer supports consistent cross-method comparison within a unified interface. We demonstrate end-to-end usage with concise examples and two case studies, highlighting interoperable and reproducible ECG explainability.

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.

Trust calibration -- aligning user trust judgment with model capability -- is crucial for safe deployment of explainable AI (XAI), yet is often evaluated via global trust ratings detached from objective performance evidence. We present a preregistered, incentivized between-subject online study (N=418 representative UK sample) on explainable skin-lesion classification that disentangles expectation-setting from experienced performance. Participants completed 15 case evaluations using a fixed XAI panel (malignancy score, reliability score, and saliency map). We systematically manipulated five experimental onboarding conditions varying example-based information and limitation disclosures with five stimulus packages naturally varying observed prediction quality. Calibration was operationalized as the deviation between trust-related judgments (TAIS and case-wise ratings) and objective performance benchmarks for the encountered cases, analysed with hierarchical mixed-effects models. Only limitation disclosure for case-wise measures reliably impacts trust calibration, and short-term experience did not yield progressive calibration. Further, the experienced package of stimuli explained substantially more variance than the experimental manipulation. However, participants were hard-pressed to differentiate between case-wise perceived trust, trustworthiness, and accuracy estimation. We discuss implications for designing limitation communication and for measuring and analysing calibration metrics in XAI evaluations. All study materials and data of this study are publicly available for replication and further academic use.

During thDuring the last few years, the term Mechanistic Interpretability, a specific area, under the umbrella of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), has been introduced, to explain the decisions made by complex machine learning (ML) models in critical systems like UAV intrusion detection systems (UAVIDS). In this paper, we apply best-practices for data pre-processing and examine a wide range of tree-ensembles, deep neural networks, hybrid stacking models and the latest ensemble neural networks to detect intrusions in UAV, with stratified 10-fold cross validation. With our top-performing model, XGBoost, we proceed to Shapley Additive explanations (SHAP), to analyze the global and local feature importances and understand which features, each attack targets, to mimic normal traffic and where the misclassifications occur. Furthermore a distribution analysis follows, by visually comparing violin plots and the curves of kernel density estimations. With the Westfall-Young permutation test for multiple comparisons, the Bandwidth optimization of the KDEs and the selection of Jensen-Shannon Distance for the test, we discover the true causes of false predictions, observed in Wormhole and Blackhole attacks in UAVIDS-2025. The findings provide robust, reliable and explainable models for UAV intrusion detection, along with statistical insights, which capture and clarify the masked nature of the attacks, regarding the challenge of Density Support Intersection, between these attacks, in this dataset.

Lack of transparency in AI systems poses challenges in critical real-life applications. It is important to be able to explain the decisions of an AI system to ensure trust on the system. Explainable AI (XAI) algorithms play a vital role in achieving this objective. In this paper, we are proposing a new algorithm for Explaining AI systems, FAMeX (Feature Association Map based eXplainability). The proposed algorithm is based on a graph-theoretic formulation of the feature set termed as Feature Association Map (FAM). The foundation of the modelling is based on association between features. The proposed FAMeX algorithm has been found to be better than the competing XAI algorithms - Permutation Feature Importance (PFI) and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Experiments conducted with eight benchmark algorithms show that FAMeX is able to gauge feature importance in the context of classification better than the competing algorithms. This definitely shows that FAMeX is a promising algorithm in explaining the predictions from an AI system

Interpretable machine learning aims to provide transparent models whose decision-making processes can be readily understood by humans. Recent advances in rule-based approaches, such as expressive Boolean formulas (BoolXAI), offer faithful and compact representations of model behavior. However, for non-technical stakeholders, main challenges remain in practice: (i) selecting semantically meaningful features and (ii) translating formal logical rules into accessible explanations. In this work, we propose BoolXLLM , as a hybrid framework that integrates Large Language Models (LLMs) into the end-to-end pipeline of Boolean rule learning. We augment BoolXAI , an expressive Boolean rule-based classifier, with LLMs at three critical stages: (1) feature selection, where LLMs guide the identification of domain-relevant variables; (2) threshold recommendation, where LLMs propose semantically meaningful discretization strategies for numerical features; and (3) rule compression and interpretation, where Boolean rules are translated into natural language explanations at both global and local levels. This integration bridges formal, faithful explanations with human-understandable narratives. This allows build an explainable AI system that is both theoretically grounded and accessible to non-experts. Early empirical results demonstrate that LLM-assisted pipelines improve interpretability while maintaining competitive predictive performance. Our work highlights the promise of combining symbolic reasoning with language-based models for human-centered explainability.

Financial institutions increasingly require AI explanations that are persistent, cross-validated across methods, and conversationally accessible to human decision-makers. We present an architecture for human-centered explainable AI in financial sentiment analysis that combines three contributions. First, we treat XAI artifacts -- LIME feature attributions, occlusion-based word importance scores, and saliency heatmaps -- as persistent, searchable objects in distributed S3-compatible storage with structured metadata and natural-language summaries, enabling semantic retrieval over explanation history and automatic index reconstruction after system failures. Second, we enable multi-method explanation triangulation, where a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) assistant compares and synthesizes results from multiple XAI methods applied to the same prediction, allowing users to assess explanation robustness through natural-language dialogue. Third, we evaluate the faithfulness of generated explanations using automated checks over grounding completeness, hallucinated claims, and method-attribution behavior. We demonstrate the architecture on an EXTRA-BRAIN financial sentiment analysis pipeline using FinBERT predictions and present evaluation results showing that constrained prompting reduces hallucination rate by 36% and increases method-attribution citations by 73% compared to naive prompting. We discuss implications for trustworthy, human-centered AI services in regulated financial environments.

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are being incorporated into scientific research workflows with the potential to enhance efficiency in tasks such as document analysis, question answering (Q&A), and literature search. However, system outputs are often difficult to verify, lack transparency in their generation and remain prone to errors. Suitable benchmarks are needed to document and evaluate arising issues. Nevertheless, existing benchmarking approaches are not adequately capturing human-centered criteria such as usability, interpretability, and integration into research workflows. To address this gap, the present work proposes and applies a benchmarking framework combining human-centered and computer-centered metrics to evaluate AI-based Q&A and literature review tools for research use. The findings suggest that Q&A tools can offer valuable overviews and generally accurate summaries; however, they are not always reliable for precise information extraction. Explainable AI (xAI) accuracy was particularly low, meaning highlighted source passages frequently failed to correspond to generated answers. This shifted the burden of validation back onto the researcher. Literature review tools supported exploratory searches but showed low reproducibility, limited transparency regarding chosen sources and databases, and inconsistent source quality, making them unsuitable for systematic reviews. A comparison of these tool groups reveals a similar pattern: while AI tools can enhance efficiency in the early stages of the research workflow and shallow tasks, their outputs still require human verification. The findings underscore the importance of explainability features to enhance transparency, verification efficiency and careful integration of AI tools into researchers' workflows. Further, human-centered evaluation remains an important concern to ensure practical applicability.

Ante-hoc interpretability methods based on prototypes provide highly accurate explanations by utilizing the intuitive "this looks like that" reasoning paradigm. On the other hand, post-hoc models can explain predictions for a single image without relying on an underlying dataset or requiring costly neural network retraining. Recent approaches successfully solve the retraining problem for prototype-based networks. However, they still face a fundamental limitation: they require access to a subset of data (e.g., a test or validation set) to search for and extract the visual prototypes. In this paper, we address this issue and introduce ProDG: Generative Prototypes for Data-Free Post-Hoc Explainability, a novel framework that leverages generative models to synthesize pure, high-fidelity prototypes directly from the frozen model's weights, completely eliminating the dependency on any external data. By establishing this new frontier in Data-Free XAI, ProDG unlocks robust visual interpretability for privacy-sensitive domains, where original data is strictly restricted or fundamentally inaccessible. Project page: https://github.com/piotr310100/ProDG

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.