arXiv:2608. 02697v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Attribution methods (AMs) assign an importance score to each feature and are widely adopted to explain black-box models.
arXiv:2511.15371v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Assessing the importance of individual features in Machine Learning is critical to understand the model's decision-making process. While numerous m...
The paper introduces a hypothesis‑testing framework that embeds feature importance methods (FIMs) within a Weight of Evidence (WoE) analysis. By quantifying how strongly observed evidence supports a given hypothesis—whether from domain knowledge, ground truth, or the FIM itself—the approach evaluates FIM alignment and variability. The authors provide theoretical links between WoE and attribution variance and demonstrate the method on LIME and SHAP explanations across varied reference hypotheses.
arXiv:2609.06173v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-deployment drift poses a critical risk to algorithmic accountability, particularly when ground truth labels are delayed and performance degradatio...
arXiv:2607. 14271v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Feature-attribution methods are central to explainable artificial intelligence.
arXiv:2610.01641v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern machine-learning models often contain strongly dependent or redundant features, making feature attribution difficult because shared predictive...
arXiv:2606. 03885v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Feature attribution methods explain predictions by assigning importance scores to input features.
arXiv:2607. 29614v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid adoption of deep learning models in high-risk domains has intensified the need for trustworthy Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI).
arXiv:2601. 17952v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Interpretability remains a key challenge for deploying language models (LM) in clinical settings such as progression diagnosis of Alzheimer disease, where early and trustworthy predictions are essential.
arXiv:2607. 16652v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This position paper argues that claims about explanation stability are scientifically invalid without cross method validation.
arXiv:2304. 13836v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The RemOve-And-Retrain (ROAR) benchmark is widely used to evaluate feature attribution methods, yet its validity remains underexplored from an information-theoretic perspective.
arXiv:2608.30333v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Next-basket repurchase recommendation is commonly formulated as a ranking task: given a customer's purchase history, the system ranks previously purc...
The paper proposes a new evaluation test for explanation methods: if an explanation accurately captures how a model uses its features, one should be able to reconstruct the model’s predictions from it. The authors convert explanations into predictors by summing feature effects and assess how well these predictors reproduce the model on unseen data, without any fitting. They apply this test to partial dependence plots, accumulated local effects, SHAP, and LIME across multiple datasets and model families, showing that the best method depends on feature dependence and that some existing quality metrics can favor flawed explanations.