arXiv Machine Learning

Revisiting Explainable AI through Model-Independent Concept Dictionaries

arXiv AI
Jul 17

Towards a Unified Multidimensional Explainability Metric: Evaluating Trustworthiness in AI Models

arXiv:2607. 14315v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: 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.

By Georgios Makridis, Georgios Fatouros, Athanasios Kiourtis, Dimitrios Kotios, Vasileios Koukos, Dimosthenis Kyriazis, Jonh Soldatos
arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 8

Beyond Explanation: Debugging Medical Imaging Models via Concept Intervention

The paper presents a plug‑and‑play framework that uses concept-based interpretation to debug medical imaging models. By aligning a single‑modality encoder with BioMedCLIP, the authors build a Concept Bottleneck Model that allows concept‑level interventions to distinguish causal from spurious features. Experiments on Mayo Clinic ultrasound and CheXpert chest X‑ray data show that these interventions can reliably diagnose model issues and even improve performance through guided fine‑tuning.

By Samrajya Thapa, Daniel J. Quest, Timothy L. Kline, Carrie L. Langstraat, Emanuel C. Trabuco, Wei Le
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 7

SMILE: Self-Explainable Multimodal Information Bottleneck for Medical Diagnosis

The paper introduces SMILE, a self‑explainable multimodal information bottleneck framework for medical diagnosis. It jointly optimizes predictive accuracy and modality‑specific explainability by selecting the most informative elements within each data modality. Experiments on diverse medical datasets show strong diagnostic performance, including a 9.1‑percentage‑point accuracy gain on the iCTCF dataset, and provide transparent, modality‑aware explanations that enhance both explainability and generalization.

By Yuqing Yang, Alexander Schmatz, Zhaozhao Ma, Changkyu Choi, Robert Jenssen, Shujian Yu
arXiv AI
Sep 16

A unified framework for global and local interpretability using adaptive derivative-ordered random explanation

The paper introduces Adaptive Derivative-Ordered Random Explanation (ADORE), a unified framework that uses first- and second-order derivatives to capture nonlinear feature interactions and feature-sample dynamics. ADORE combines global feature importance with local sample contributions, quantifying both magnitude and direction of feature impact while identifying critical samples. It achieves computational efficiency via randomized SVD and dynamic sparsity detection, outperforming LIME and SHAP across tabular, text, and image data, and is released as an open-source Python package on GitHub.

By Lemen Chao, Ming Lei, Anran Fanga
arXiv AI
Oct 2

Explainability of Complex AI Models with Correlation Impact Ratio

The paper introduces ExCIR, a new explainability metric that addresses limitations of existing post‑hoc explainers by accurately handling correlated features and avoiding costly perturbations. ExCIR is theoretically grounded, computationally efficient, and remains stable under noise and sampling variations. Experiments on EEG, synthetic vehicular data, Digits, and Cats‑Dogs datasets show that ExCIR provides more interpretable feature explanations than current methods, and its information‑theoretic extension supports multi‑output and class‑conditioned explanations at scale.

By Poushali Sengupta, Rabindra Khadka, Sabita Maharjan, Frank Eliassen, Yan Zhang, Shashi Raj Pandey, Pedro G. Lind, Anis Yazidi
arXiv AI
Sep 28

A Synthetic Ground-Truth Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AI Methods

The paper introduces a synthetic ground‑truth framework for evaluating explainable AI (XAI) methods, addressing the lack of reliable evaluation procedures. By using controlled interventions to create datasets where the importance of input components is known, the framework generates ground‑truth explanations that align with the model’s actual decision process. The authors apply this approach to binary images, tabular data, and time series, and find that nine popular XAI methods exhibit significant limitations, underscoring the need for intervention‑based benchmarks.

By Miquel Mir\'o-Nicolau, Francesco Spinnato, Riccardo Guidotti
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 7

From Interpretability Methods to Interpretable Models

The paper argues that explainable AI for computer vision has focused too much on developing interpretability methods rather than assessing how interpretable the models themselves are. It proposes a shift toward model-centric evaluation, using existing tools to compare what different models represent and compute, and emphasizes the need to measure whether humans can truly understand these models. The authors review the current toolbox, survey limited model comparison work, draw parallels to systems neuroscience, and outline a future agenda for model-focused XAI.

By Julien Colin, Nuria Oliver, Thomas Serre