arXiv Machine Learning

XALIGN: A Human-centric Visual Analytics Approach to Understanding AI Explanations

XALIGN is a visual analytics workflow that displays rule-based explanations alongside feature attribution methods (TreeSHAP, KernelSHAP, and LIME) for the same Random Forest model, making agreements and contradictions between methods visible. In case studies on German Credit and meteorological data, XALIGN uncovered discrepancies that single-method analyses would miss. An expert evaluation showed that specialists found XALIGN helpful for identifying influential features and preventing over-trust in predictions, though linking rules to attributions was more challenging for those without an XAI background.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Oct 22

XALIGN: A Human-centric Visual Analytics Approach to Understanding AI Explanations

XALIGN is a visual analytics workflow that simultaneously displays rule‑based explanations and multiple feature attribution methods (TreeSHAP, KernelSHAP, and LIME) for a single Random Forest model. By aligning these methods side by side, XALIGN makes agreements and contradictions between them visible, allowing users to compare explanations against domain knowledge. The approach was tested on the German Credit dataset and a meteorological classification task, where it uncovered discrepancies that single‑method analyses missed, and experts reported it helped identify influential features and reduce over‑trust in predictions.

arXiv AI
Sep 11

XAI-Arena: Can LLMs Assess the Quality of XAI Explanations?

XAI-Arena proposes using large language models (LLMs) as judges to evaluate the quality of explainable AI (XAI) explanations, aiming for reproducibility, scalability, and multidimensional assessment. The framework assesses dimensions such as simplicity, clarity, task adequacy, trust calibration, actionability, transparency, faithfulness, and overall interpretability across different datasets, models, and stakeholder personas. Human validation shows a strong positive correlation between LLM-generated and human ratings (Spearman's rho = .693, p < .001), supporting the viability of LLM-based evaluations.

By Yanfei Hu Fleischhauer, Alona Zharova, Nadja Klein, Stefan Feuerriegel
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 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 AI
Oct 12

Faithfulness Without Anchors: A Position Paper on the Structural Misalignments of Explainable AI Faithfulness Metrics for Feature Importance

The paper argues that explainable AI (XAI) tools, intended to increase trust in machine learning models, often fail to do so and instead foster overreliance on incorrect predictions. It attributes this failure to the unfaithfulness of XAI methods, which oversimplify model internals and misalign explanations with the actual model behavior. The authors identify five major shortcomings in current faithfulness metrics and propose four research directions to improve their reliability.

By Marco Zullich, Emily Schiller, Ivan Gentile, David Dembinsky, Adriano Lucieri, Kilian G\"oller, Steffen Seitz
arXiv AI
Sep 16

Det-LIME: Detector-Aware, Multi-Instance Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations for Automated Marine Mammal Detection

Det‑LIME is a detector‑aware, multi‑instance adaptation of LIME designed to explain black‑box object detectors used in marine mammal research. It generates instance‑specific, box‑aligned explanations by weighting detections, applying a proximity kernel, and using IoU‑based matching to track instances across perturbations. Evaluated on aerial drone imagery of harbor seals and a seabird case study, Det‑LIME outperformed vanilla LIME, Stabilized LIME, Deterministic LIME, and gradient‑based methods in Attribution Ratio and Max Saliency Hit Rate, offering higher‑resolution, instance‑aware explanations that aid debugging, data augmentation, and modeling improvements.

By Jiayi Zhou, David W. Johnston, Brinnae Bent
arXiv AI
Aug 26

A Formal Methodological Framework for Auditing Robustness and Fidelity in Explainable AI: From Application to Trust Certification

The paper introduces a formal auditing framework to evaluate the robustness and fidelity of post‑hoc explainers such as SHAP and LIME. It defines a Trust Score that combines how stable an explanation is under small input perturbations with how well the highlighted features actually influence the model’s prediction. Experiments on a Madagascar malnutrition dataset show that even highly accurate models can produce unreliable explanations, and that fidelity scores degrade when models overfit.

By Rosa Elysabeth Ralinirina, Jean Christian Ralaivao, Niaiko Micha\"el Ralaivao, Alain Josu\'e Ratovondrahona, Thomas Mahatody
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 7

NOTAI.AI: Explainable Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Curvature and Feature Attribution

NOTAI.AI is an explainable AI-generated text detection system that goes beyond a simple binary label by showing which signals influenced its prediction. It combines sentence-level conditional probability curvature, a neural detector score, and interpretable stylometric and readability features in an XGBoost meta-classifier, and explains predictions using TreeSHAP feature contributions that can be turned into concise natural-language explanations. Evaluated on a balanced subset of RAID, the full model achieves 0.9685 F1 and receives 94.5–98.6% approval from model judges for the faithfulness of its explanations.

By Oleksandr Marchenko Breneur, Adelaide Danilov, Aria Nourbakhsh, Salima Lamsiyah