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.
By Eric G\"unther, Bal\'azs Szabados, Kristof Meding, Gunnar K\"onig, Sebastian Bordt, Ulrike von Luxburg
The paper discusses how Large Language Models can produce natural language self‑explanations that appear plausible but may not accurately reflect the model’s reasoning. It critiques current evaluation methods for such explanations and offers practical guidelines to assess their plausibility and faithfulness. Additionally, it argues that evaluation should also consider the actionability of these explanations, showing how they can aid decision‑making for various stakeholders.
By Elize Herrewijnen, Benedetta Muscato, Gizem Gezici, Fosca Giannotti
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...
By Vittoria Vineis, Fabiano Veglianti, Lorenzo Antonelli, Claudia Di Carlo, Matteo Silvestri, Gabriele Tolomei
arXiv:2602. 06841v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Over the last decade, Explainable AI has primarily focused on interpreting individual model predictions, producing post-hoc explanations that relate inputs to outputs under a fixed decision structure.
By Sindhuja Chaduvula, Jessee Ho, Kina Kim, Aravind Narayanan, Ahmed Y. Radwan, Mahshid Alinoori, Muskan Garg, Dhanesh Ramachandram, Shaina Raza
The paper proposes an information‑flow perspective on explainability, arguing that exposing reasons for observed effects is a positive flow of information that must be specified and verified. It introduces an epistemic temporal logic with counterfactual causes to formalize the requirement that agents gain knowledge about why an effect occurred, and presents an algorithm for checking finite‑state models against these specifications. A prototype implementation is evaluated on benchmarks, demonstrating the ability to distinguish explainable from unexplainable systems and to incorporate privacy constraints.
By Bernd Finkbeiner, Hadar Frenkel, Julian Siber
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.
By Louis Mahon, Elliot Ford, Callum Hackett