Counterfactual explanations are a common tool to explain artificial intelligence models. For Reinforcement Learning (RL) agents, they answer "Why not?" or "What if?" questions by illustrating what minimal change to a state is needed such that an agent chooses a different action. Generating counterfactual explanations for RL agents with visual input is especially challenging because of their large state spaces and because their decisions are part of an overarching policy, which includes long-term decision-making. However, research focusing on counterfactual explanations, specifically for RL agents with visual input, is scarce and does not go beyond identifying defective agents. It is unclear whether counterfactual explanations are still helpful for more complex tasks like analyzing the learned strategies of different agents or choosing a fitting agent for a specific task. We propose a novel but simple method to generate counterfactual explanations for RL agents by formulating the problem as a domain transfer problem which allows the use of adversarial learning techniques like StarGAN. Our method is fully model-agnostic and we demonstrate that it outperforms the only previous method in several computational metrics. Furthermore, we show in a user study that our method performs best when analyzing which strategies different agents pursue.

In this paper, we describe VivesDebate-Speech, a corpus of spoken argumentation created to leverage audio features for argument mining tasks. The creation of this corpus represents an important contribution to the intersection of speech processing and argument mining communities, and one of the most complete publicly available resources in this topic. Moreover, we have performed a set of first-of-their-kind experiments which show an improvement when integrating audio features into the argument mining pipeline. The provided results can be used as a baseline for future research.

I searched for the following keywords in a SemanticScholar query and filter them using exact-match using papers' title abstract. This set of keywords is actually pretty conservative (initially I started with a bigger list), but even with this conservative set, 1-keyword-match filtering unfortunately resulted in many non-XAI papers being retrieved for various reasons -- so I only include papers match 2 unique keywords or more. A random sample of 100 papers yielded 99% precision with a manual check (one paper mentioned keywords in the abstract simply as motivation for adjacent research). The keyword-based search retrieved 3101 papers. Then searched for them by title using the SemanticScholar API with fuzzy matching.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems utilizing deep neural networks (DNNs) and machine learning (ML) algorithms are widely used for solving important problems in bioinformatics, biomedical informatics, and precision medicine. However, complex DNNs or ML models, which are often perceived as opaque and black-box, can make it difficult to understand the reasoning behind their decisions. This lack of transparency can be a challenge for both end-users and decision-makers, as well as AI developers. Additionally, in sensitive areas like healthcare, explainability and accountability are not only desirable but also legally required for AI systems that can have a significant impact on human lives. Fairness is another growing concern, as algorithmic decisions should not show bias or discrimination towards certain groups or individuals based on sensitive attributes. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims to overcome the opaqueness of black-box models and provide transparency in how AI systems make decisions. Interpretable ML models can explain how they make predictions and the factors that influence their outcomes. However, most state-of-the-art interpretable ML methods are domain-agnostic and evolved from fields like computer vision, automated reasoning, or statistics, making direct application to bioinformatics problems challenging without customization and domain-specific adaptation. In this paper, we discuss the importance of explainability in the context of bioinformatics, provide an overview of model-specific and model-agnostic interpretable ML methods and tools, and outline their potential caveats and drawbacks. Besides, we discuss how to customize existing interpretable ML methods for bioinformatics problems. Nevertheless, we demonstrate how XAI methods can improve transparency through case studies in bioimaging, cancer genomics, and text mining.

Explainable artificial intelligence is increasingly used in machine learning (ML) based decision-making systems in healthcare. However, little research has compared the utility of different explanation methods in guiding healthcare experts for patient care. Moreover, it is unclear how useful, understandable, actionable and trustworthy these methods are for healthcare experts, as they often require technical ML knowledge. This paper presents an explanation dashboard that predicts the risk of diabetes onset and explains those predictions with data-centric, feature-importance, and example-based explanations. We designed an interactive dashboard to assist healthcare experts, such as nurses and physicians, in monitoring the risk of diabetes onset and recommending measures to minimize risk. We conducted a qualitative study with 11 healthcare experts and a mixed-methods study with 45 healthcare experts and 51 diabetic patients to compare the different explanation methods in our dashboard in terms of understandability, usefulness, actionability, and trust. Results indicate that our participants preferred our representation of data-centric explanations that provide local explanations with a global overview over other methods. Therefore, this paper highlights the importance of visually directive data-centric explanation method for assisting healthcare experts to gain actionable insights from patient health records. Furthermore, we share our design implications for tailoring the visual representation of different explanation methods for healthcare experts.

In order to reveal the rationale behind model predictions, many works have exploited providing explanations in various forms. Recently, to further guarantee readability, more and more works turn to generate sentence-level human language explanations. However, current works pursuing sentence-level explanations rely heavily on annotated training data, which limits the development of interpretability to only a few tasks. As far as we know, this paper is the first to explore this problem smoothly from weak-supervised learning to unsupervised learning. Besides, we also notice the high latency of autoregressive sentence-level explanation generation, which leads to asynchronous interpretability after prediction. Therefore, we propose a non-autoregressive interpretable model to facilitate parallel explanation generation and simultaneous prediction. Through extensive experiments on Natural Language Inference task and Spouse Prediction task, we find that users are able to train classifiers with comparable performance $10-15\times$ faster with parallel explanation generation using only a few or no annotated training data.

There has been a surge in Explainable-AI (XAI) methods that provide insights into the workings of Deep Neural Network (DNN) models. Integrated Gradients (IG) is a popular XAI algorithm that attributes relevance scores to input features commensurate with their contribution to the model's output. However, it requires multiple forward \& backward passes through the model. Thus, compared to a single forward-pass inference, there is a significant computational overhead to generate the explanation which hinders real-time XAI. This work addresses the aforementioned issue by accelerating IG with a hardware-aware algorithm optimization. We propose a novel non-uniform interpolation scheme to compute the IG attribution scores which replaces the baseline uniform interpolation. Our algorithm significantly reduces the total interpolation steps required without adversely impacting convergence. Experiments on the ImageNet dataset using a pre-trained InceptionV3 model demonstrate \textit{2.6-3.6}$\times$ performance speedup on GPU systems for iso-convergence. This includes the minimal \textit{0.2-3.2}\% latency overhead introduced by the pre-processing stage of computing the non-uniform interpolation step-sizes.

By providing explanations for users and system designers to facilitate better understanding and decision making, explainable recommendation has been an important research problem. In this paper, we propose Counterfactual Explainable Recommendation (CountER), which takes the insights of counterfactual reasoning from causal inference for explainable recommendation. CountER is able to formulate the complexity and the strength of explanations, and it adopts a counterfactual learning framework to seek simple (low complexity) and effective (high strength) explanations for the model decision. Technically, for each item recommended to each user, CountER formulates a joint optimization problem to generate minimal changes on the item aspects so as to create a counterfactual item, such that the recommendation decision on the counterfactual item is reversed. These altered aspects constitute the explanation of why the original item is recommended. The counterfactual explanation helps both the users for better understanding and the system designers for better model debugging. Another contribution of the work is the evaluation of explainable recommendation, which has been a challenging task. Fortunately, counterfactual explanations are very suitable for standard quantitative evaluation. To measure the explanation quality, we design two types of evaluation metrics, one from user's perspective (i.e. why the user likes the item), and the other from model's perspective (i.e. why the item is recommended by the model). We apply our counterfactual learning algorithm on a black-box recommender system and evaluate the generated explanations on five real-world datasets. Results show that our model generates more accurate and effective explanations than state-of-the-art explainable recommendation models.

Despite the proliferation of explainable AI (XAI) methods, little is understood about end-users' explainability needs and behaviors around XAI explanations. To address this gap and contribute to understanding how explainability can support human-AI interaction, we conducted a mixed-methods study with 20 end-users of a real-world AI application, the Merlin bird identification app, and inquired about their XAI needs, uses, and perceptions. We found that participants desire practically useful information that can improve their collaboration with the AI, more so than technical system details. Relatedly, participants intended to use XAI explanations for various purposes beyond understanding the AI's outputs: calibrating trust, improving their task skills, changing their behavior to supply better inputs to the AI, and giving constructive feedback to developers. Finally, among existing XAI approaches, participants preferred part-based explanations that resemble human reasoning and explanations. We discuss the implications of our findings and provide recommendations for future XAI design.

This paper applies eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods to investigate the socioeconomic disparities in COVID patient mortality. An Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) prediction model is built based on a de-identified Austin area hospital dataset to predict the mortality of COVID-19 patients. We apply two XAI methods, Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and Locally Interpretable Model Agnostic Explanations (LIME), to compare the global and local interpretation of feature importance. This paper demonstrates the advantages of using XAI which shows the feature importance and decisive capability. Furthermore, we use the XAI methods to cross-validate their interpretations for individual patients. The XAI models reveal that Medicare financial class, older age, and gender have high impact on the mortality prediction. We find that LIME local interpretation does not show significant differences in feature importance comparing to SHAP, which suggests pattern confirmation. This paper demonstrates the importance of XAI methods in cross-validation of feature attributions.