arXiv:2608. 06351v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper addresses the limitations of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) with respect to insufficient evaluation.
arXiv:2608. 10766v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) seeks to explain how an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system arrived at a particular decision.
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.
arXiv:2606. 14838v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: How to define a good explanation is a long-standing philosophical debate which has found recent renewed interest in the context of AI outputs.
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.
arXiv:2608.21449v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Time series arise in a wide range of application domains and are analyzed using machine learning in decision-critical settings. Time series classificat...
arXiv:2606. 16786v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Algorithmic explanations are intended to help stakeholders understand opaque algorithmic decisions, but in practice, they often fall short.
arXiv:2411. 08875v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Existing algorithms for explaining the output of image classifiers use different definitions of explanations and a variety of techniques to find them.
arXiv:2607. 14123v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Despite the proliferation of Explainable AI (XAI) techniques -- from feature attributions to sparse autoencoders -- explanations rarely influence real-world workflows.
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.
arXiv:2609.26037v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Explanations are central to causal reasoning, and cognitive science has long established that the human drive to explain is itself a mechanism for lear...
arXiv:2605. 27618v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Despite the wide use of explainability techniques to attempt to understand the behavior of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the generated explanations may not always be reliable.
arXiv:2609.06063v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI Agents are increasingly deployed in real-world settings, where they interact with external tools and make sequential decisions with limited human ov...