Understanding the combined influences of meteorological and hydrological factors on water level and flood events is essential, particularly in today's changing climate environments. Transformer, as one kind of the cutting-edge deep learning methods, offers an effective approach to model intricate nonlinear processes, enables the extraction of key features and water level predictions. EXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods play important roles in enhancing the understandings of how different factors impact water level. In this study, we propose a Transformer variant by integrating sparse attention mechanism and introducing nonlinear output layer for the decoder module. The variant model is utilized for multi-step forecasting of water level, by considering meteorological and hydrological factors simultaneously. It is shown that the variant model outperforms traditional Transformer across different lead times with respect to various evaluation metrics. The sensitivity analyses based on XAI technology demonstrate the significant influence of meteorological factors on water level evolution, in which temperature is shown to be the most dominant meteorological factor. Therefore, incorporating both meteorological and hydrological factors is necessary for reliable hydrological prediction and flood prevention. In the meantime, XAI technology provides insights into certain predictions, which is beneficial for understanding the prediction results and evaluating the reasonability.
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is a pivotal research domain aimed at understanding the operational mechanisms of AI systems, particularly those considered ``black boxes'' due to their complex, opaque nature. XAI seeks to make these AI systems more understandable and trustworthy, providing insight into their decision-making processes. By producing clear and comprehensible explanations, XAI enables users, practitioners, and stakeholders to trust a model's decisions. This work analyses the value of data morphology strategies in generating counterfactual explanations. It introduces the Overlap Number of Balls Model-Agnostic CounterFactuals (ONB-MACF) method, a model-agnostic counterfactual generator that leverages data morphology to estimate a model's decision boundaries. The ONB-MACF method constructs hyperspheres in the data space whose covered points share a class, mapping the decision boundary. Counterfactuals are then generated by incrementally adjusting an instance's attributes towards the nearest alternate-class hypersphere, crossing the decision boundary with minimal modifications. By design, the ONB-MACF method generates feasible and sparse counterfactuals that follow the data distribution. Our comprehensive benchmark from a double perspective (quantitative and qualitative) shows that the ONB-MACF method outperforms existing state-of-the-art counterfactual generation methods across multiple quality metrics on diverse tabular datasets. This supports our hypothesis, showcasing the potential of data-morphology-based explainability strategies for trustworthy AI.
Expert search and team formation systems operate on collaboration networks, with nodes representing individuals, labeled with their skills, and edges denoting collaboration relationships. Given a keyword query corresponding to the desired skills, these systems identify experts that best match the query. However, state-of-the-art solutions to this problem lack transparency. To address this issue, we propose ExES, a tool designed to explain expert search and team formation systems using factual and counterfactual methods from the field of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). ExES uses factual explanations to highlight important skills and collaborations, and counterfactual explanations to suggest new skills and collaborations to increase the likelihood of being identified as an expert. Towards a practical deployment as an interactive explanation tool, we present and experimentally evaluate a suite of pruning strategies to speed up the explanation search. In many cases, our pruning strategies make ExES an order of magnitude faster than exhaustive search, while still producing concise and actionable explanations.
The evolving landscape of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims to improve the interpretability of intricate machine learning (ML) models, yet faces challenges in formalisation and empirical validation, being an inherently unsupervised process. In this paper, we bring together various benchmark datasets and novel performance metrics in an initial benchmarking platform, the Explainable AI Comparison Toolkit (EXACT), providing a standardised foundation for evaluating XAI methods. Our datasets incorporate ground truth explanations for class-conditional features, and leveraging novel quantitative metrics, this platform assesses the performance of post-hoc XAI methods in the quality of the explanations they produce. Our recent findings have highlighted the limitations of popular XAI methods, as they often struggle to surpass random baselines, attributing significance to irrelevant features. Moreover, we show the variability in explanations derived from different equally performing model architectures. This initial benchmarking platform therefore aims to allow XAI researchers to test and assure the high quality of their newly developed methods.
A central goal of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is to assign relative importance to the features of a Machine Learning (ML) model given some prediction. The importance of this task of explainability by feature attribution is illustrated by the ubiquitous recent use of tools such as SHAP and LIME. Unfortunately, the exact computation of feature attributions, using the game-theoretical foundation underlying SHAP and LIME, can yield manifestly unsatisfactory results, that tantamount to reporting misleading relative feature importance. Recent work targeted rigorous feature attribution, by studying axiomatic aggregations of features based on logic-based definitions of explanations by feature selection. This paper shows that there is an essential relationship between feature attribution and a priori voting power, and that those recently proposed axiomatic aggregations represent a few instantiations of the range of power indices studied in the past. Furthermore, it remains unclear how some of the most widely used power indices might be exploited as feature importance scores (FISs), i.e. the use of power indices in XAI, and which of these indices would be the best suited for the purposes of XAI by feature attribution, namely in terms of not producing results that could be deemed as unsatisfactory. This paper proposes novel desirable properties that FISs should exhibit. In addition, the paper also proposes novel FISs exhibiting the proposed properties. Finally, the paper conducts a rigorous analysis of the best-known power indices in terms of the proposed properties.
The classification of statements provided by individuals during police interviews is a complex and significant task within the domain of natural language processing (NLP) and legal informatics. The lack of extensive domain-specific datasets raises challenges to the advancement of NLP methods in the field. This paper aims to address some of the present challenges by introducing a novel dataset tailored for classification of statements made during police interviews, prior to court proceedings. Utilising the curated dataset for training and evaluation, we introduce a fine-tuned DistilBERT model that achieves state-of-the-art performance in distinguishing truthful from deceptive statements. To enhance interpretability, we employ explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods to offer explainability through saliency maps, that interpret the model's decision-making process. Lastly, we present an XAI interface that empowers both legal professionals and non-specialists to interact with and benefit from our system. Our model achieves an accuracy of 86%, and is shown to outperform a custom transformer architecture in a comparative study. This holistic approach advances the accessibility, transparency, and effectiveness of statement analysis, with promising implications for both legal practice and research.
The evolution of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has emphasised the significance of meeting diverse user needs. The approaches to identifying and addressing these needs must also advance, recognising that explanation experiences are subjective, user-centred processes that interact with users towards a better understanding of AI decision-making. This paper delves into the interrelations in multi-faceted XAI and examines how different types of explanations collaboratively meet users' XAI needs. We introduce the Intent Fulfilment Framework (IFF) for creating explanation experiences. The novelty of this paper lies in recognising the importance of "follow-up" on explanations for obtaining clarity, verification and/or substitution. Moreover, the Explanation Experience Dialogue Model integrates the IFF and "Explanation Followups" to provide users with a conversational interface for exploring their explanation needs, thereby creating explanation experiences. Quantitative and qualitative findings from our comparative user study demonstrate the impact of the IFF in improving user engagement, the utility of the AI system and the overall user experience. Overall, we reinforce the principle that "one explanation does not fit all" to create explanation experiences that guide the complex interaction through conversation.
SMS, or short messaging service, is a widely used and cost-effective communication medium that has sadly turned into a haven for unwanted messages, commonly known as SMS spam. With the rapid adoption of smartphones and Internet connectivity, SMS spam has emerged as a prevalent threat. Spammers have taken notice of the significance of SMS for mobile phone users. Consequently, with the emergence of new cybersecurity threats, the number of SMS spam has expanded significantly in recent years. The unstructured format of SMS data creates significant challenges for SMS spam detection, making it more difficult to successfully fight spam attacks in the cybersecurity domain. In this work, we employ optimized and fine-tuned transformer-based Large Language Models (LLMs) to solve the problem of spam message detection. We use a benchmark SMS spam dataset for this spam detection and utilize several preprocessing techniques to get clean and noise-free data and solve the class imbalance problem using the text augmentation technique. The overall experiment showed that our optimized fine-tuned BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers) variant model RoBERTa obtained high accuracy with 99.84\%. We also work with Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques to calculate the positive and negative coefficient scores which explore and explain the fine-tuned model transparency in this text-based spam SMS detection task. In addition, traditional Machine Learning (ML) models were also examined to compare their performance with the transformer-based models. This analysis describes how LLMs can make a good impact on complex textual-based spam data in the cybersecurity field.
The necessity for interpretability in natural language processing (NLP) has risen alongside the growing prominence of large language models. Among the myriad tasks within NLP, text generation stands out as a primary objective of autoregressive models. The NLP community has begun to take a keen interest in gaining a deeper understanding of text generation, leading to the development of model-agnostic explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) methods tailored to this task. The design and evaluation of explainability methods are non-trivial since they depend on many factors involved in the text generation process, e.g., the autoregressive model and its stochastic nature. This paper outlines 17 challenges categorized into three groups that arise during the development and assessment of attribution-based explainability methods. These challenges encompass issues concerning tokenization, defining explanation similarity, determining token importance and prediction change metrics, the level of human intervention required, and the creation of suitable test datasets. The paper illustrates how these challenges can be intertwined, showcasing new opportunities for the community. These include developing probabilistic word-level explainability methods and engaging humans in the explainability pipeline, from the data design to the final evaluation, to draw robust conclusions on xAI methods.
The uses of machine learning (ML) have snowballed in recent years. In many cases, ML models are highly complex, and their operation is beyond the understanding of human decision-makers. Nevertheless, some uses of ML models involve high-stakes and safety-critical applications. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims to help human decision-makers in understanding the operation of such complex ML models, thus eliciting trust in their operation. Unfortunately, the majority of past XAI work is based on informal approaches, that offer no guarantees of rigor. Unsurprisingly, there exists comprehensive experimental and theoretical evidence confirming that informal methods of XAI can provide human-decision makers with erroneous information. Logic-based XAI represents a rigorous approach to explainability; it is model-based and offers the strongest guarantees of rigor of computed explanations. However, a well-known drawback of logic-based XAI is the complexity of logic reasoning, especially for highly complex ML models. Recent work proposed distance-restricted explanations, i.e. explanations that are rigorous provided the distance to a given input is small enough. Distance-restricted explainability is tightly related with adversarial robustness, and it has been shown to scale for moderately complex ML models, but the number of inputs still represents a key limiting factor. This paper investigates novel algorithms for scaling up the performance of logic-based explainers when computing and enumerating ML model explanations with a large number of inputs.
With the digitalization of health care systems, artificial intelligence becomes more present in medicine. Especially machine learning shows great potential for complex tasks such as time series classification, usually at the cost of transparency and comprehensibility. This leads to a lack of trust by humans and thus hinders its active usage. Explainable artificial intelligence tries to close this gap by providing insight into the decision-making process, the actual usefulness of its different methods is however unclear. This paper proposes a user study based evaluation of the explanation method Grad-CAM with application to a neural network for the classification of breaths in time series neonatal ventilation data. We present the perceived usefulness of the explainability method by different stakeholders, exposing the difficulty to achieve actual transparency and the wish for more in-depth explanations by many of the participants.
In response to the demand for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), we investigate the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to transform ML explanations into natural, human-readable narratives. Rather than directly explaining ML models using LLMs, we focus on refining explanations computed using existing XAI algorithms. We outline several research directions, including defining evaluation metrics, prompt design, comparing LLM models, exploring further training methods, and integrating external data. Initial experiments and user study suggest that LLMs offer a promising way to enhance the interpretability and usability of XAI.
In this paper, we demonstrate the feasibility of alterfactual explanations for black box image classifiers. Traditional explanation mechanisms from the field of Counterfactual Thinking are a widely-used paradigm for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), as they follow a natural way of reasoning that humans are familiar with. However, most common approaches from this field are based on communicating information about features or characteristics that are especially important for an AI's decision. However, to fully understand a decision, not only knowledge about relevant features is needed, but the awareness of irrelevant information also highly contributes to the creation of a user's mental model of an AI system. To this end, a novel approach for explaining AI systems called alterfactual explanations was recently proposed on a conceptual level. It is based on showing an alternative reality where irrelevant features of an AI's input are altered. By doing so, the user directly sees which input data characteristics can change arbitrarily without influencing the AI's decision. In this paper, we show for the first time that it is possible to apply this idea to black box models based on neural networks. To this end, we present a GAN-based approach to generate these alterfactual explanations for binary image classifiers. Further, we present a user study that gives interesting insights on how alterfactual explanations can complement counterfactual explanations.
Ownership verification is currently the most critical and widely adopted post-hoc method to safeguard model copyright. In general, model owners exploit it to identify whether a given suspicious third-party model is stolen from them by examining whether it has particular properties `inherited' from their released models. Currently, backdoor-based model watermarks are the primary and cutting-edge methods to implant such properties in the released models. However, backdoor-based methods have two fatal drawbacks, including harmfulness and ambiguity. The former indicates that they introduce maliciously controllable misclassification behaviors ($i.e.$, backdoor) to the watermarked released models. The latter denotes that malicious users can easily pass the verification by finding other misclassified samples, leading to ownership ambiguity. In this paper, we argue that both limitations stem from the `zero-bit' nature of existing watermarking schemes, where they exploit the status ($i.e.$, misclassified) of predictions for verification. Motivated by this understanding, we design a new watermarking paradigm, $i.e.$, Explanation as a Watermark (EaaW), that implants verification behaviors into the explanation of feature attribution instead of model predictions. Specifically, EaaW embeds a `multi-bit' watermark into the feature attribution explanation of specific trigger samples without changing the original prediction. We correspondingly design the watermark embedding and extraction algorithms inspired by explainable artificial intelligence. In particular, our approach can be used for different tasks ($e.g.$, image classification and text generation). Extensive experiments verify the effectiveness and harmlessness of our EaaW and its resistance to potential attacks.
A cautious interpretation of AI regulations and policy in the EU and the USA place explainability as a central deliverable of compliant AI systems. However, from a technical perspective, explainable AI (XAI) remains an elusive and complex target where even state of the art methods often reach erroneous, misleading, and incomplete explanations. "Explainability" has multiple meanings which are often used interchangeably, and there are an even greater number of XAI methods - none of which presents a clear edge. Indeed, there are multiple failure modes for each XAI method, which require application-specific development and continuous evaluation. In this paper, we analyze legislative and policy developments in the United States and the European Union, such as the Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, the AI Act, the AI Liability Directive, and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) from a right to explanation perspective. We argue that these AI regulations and current market conditions threaten effective AI governance and safety because the objective of trustworthy, accountable, and transparent AI is intrinsically linked to the questionable ability of AI operators to provide meaningful explanations. Unless governments explicitly tackle the issue of explainability through clear legislative and policy statements that take into account technical realities, AI governance risks becoming a vacuous "box-ticking" exercise where scientific standards are replaced with legalistic thresholds, providing only a false sense of security in XAI.
Explainable Artificial Intelligence and Formal Argumentation have received significant attention in recent years. Argumentation-based systems often lack explainability while supporting decision-making processes. Counterfactual and semifactual explanations are interpretability techniques that provide insights into the outcome of a model by generating alternative hypothetical instances. While there has been important work on counterfactual and semifactual explanations for Machine Learning models, less attention has been devoted to these kinds of problems in argumentation. In this paper, we explore counterfactual and semifactual reasoning in abstract Argumentation Framework. We investigate the computational complexity of counterfactual- and semifactual-based reasoning problems, showing that they are generally harder than classical argumentation problems such as credulous and skeptical acceptance. Finally, we show that counterfactual and semifactual queries can be encoded in weak-constrained Argumentation Framework, and provide a computational strategy through ASP solvers.
In this study, we aim to identify the most effective machine learning model for accurately classifying Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) types from Reddit posts and a Kaggle data set. We apply multi-label classification using the Binary Relevance method. We use Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approach to highlight the transparency and understandability of the process and result. To achieve this, we experiment with glass-box learning models, i.e. models designed for simplicity, transparency, and interpretability. We selected k-Nearest Neighbour, Multinomial Naive Bayes, and Logistic Regression for the glass-box models. We show that Multinomial Naive Bayes and k-Nearest Neighbour perform better if classes with Observer (S) traits are excluded, whereas Logistic Regression obtains its best results when all classes have > 550 entries.
The Model Parameter Randomisation Test (MPRT) is highly recognised in the eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) community due to its fundamental evaluative criterion: explanations should be sensitive to the parameters of the model they seek to explain. However, recent studies have raised several methodological concerns for the empirical interpretation of MPRT. In response, we propose two modifications to the original test: Smooth MPRT and Efficient MPRT. The former reduces the impact of noise on evaluation outcomes via sampling, while the latter avoids the need for biased similarity measurements by re-interpreting the test through the increase in explanation complexity after full model randomisation. Our experiments show that these modifications enhance the metric reliability, facilitating a more trustworthy deployment of explanation methods.
Developing a general information processing model in uncertain environments is fundamental for the advancement of explainable artificial intelligence. Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence is a well-known and effective reasoning method for representing epistemic uncertainty, which is closely related to subjective probability theory and possibility theory. Although they can be transformed to each other under some particular belief structures, there remains a lack of a clear and interpretable transformation process, as well as a unified approach for information processing. In this paper, we aim to address these issues from the perspectives of isopignistic belief functions and the hyper-cautious transferable belief model. Firstly, we propose an isopignistic transformation based on the belief evolution network. This transformation allows for the adjustment of the information granule while retaining the potential decision outcome. The isopignistic transformation is integrated with a hyper-cautious transferable belief model to establish a new canonical decomposition. This decomposition offers a reverse path between the possibility distribution and its isopignistic mass functions. The result of the canonical decomposition, called isopignistic function, is an identical information content distribution to reflect the propensity and relative commitment degree of the BPA. Furthermore, this paper introduces a method to reconstruct the basic belief assignment by adjusting the isopignistic function. It explores the advantages of this approach in modeling and handling uncertainty within the hyper-cautious transferable belief model. More general, this paper establishes a theoretical basis for building general models of artificial intelligence based on probability theory, Dempster-Shafer theory, and possibility theory.
Nowadays, large-scale foundation models are being increasingly integrated into numerous safety-critical applications, including human-autonomy teaming (HAT) within transportation, medical, and defence domains. Consequently, the inherent 'black-box' nature of these sophisticated deep neural networks heightens the significance of fostering mutual understanding and trust between humans and autonomous systems. To tackle the transparency challenges in HAT, this paper conducts a thoughtful study on the underexplored domain of Explainable Interface (EI) in HAT systems from a human-centric perspective, thereby enriching the existing body of research in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). We explore the design, development, and evaluation of EI within XAI-enhanced HAT systems. To do so, we first clarify the distinctions between these concepts: EI, explanations and model explainability, aiming to provide researchers and practitioners with a structured understanding. Second, we contribute to a novel framework for EI, addressing the unique challenges in HAT. Last, our summarized evaluation framework for ongoing EI offers a holistic perspective, encompassing model performance, human-centered factors, and group task objectives. Based on extensive surveys across XAI, HAT, psychology, and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), this review offers multiple novel insights into incorporating XAI into HAT systems and outlines future directions.