Explainable artificial intelligence is proposed to provide explanations for reasoning performed by an Artificial Intelligence. There is no consensus on how to evaluate the quality of these explanations, since even the definition of explanation itself is not clear in the literature. In particular, for the widely known Local Linear Explanations, there are qualitative proposals for the evaluation of explanations, although they suffer from theoretical inconsistencies. The case of image is even more problematic, where a visual explanation seems to explain a decision while detecting edges is what it really does. There are a large number of metrics in the literature specialized in quantitatively measuring different qualitative aspects so we should be able to develop metrics capable of measuring in a robust and correct way the desirable aspects of the explanations. In this paper, we propose a procedure called REVEL to evaluate different aspects concerning the quality of explanations with a theoretically coherent development. This procedure has several advances in the state of the art: it standardizes the concepts of explanation and develops a series of metrics not only to be able to compare between them but also to obtain absolute information regarding the explanation itself. The experiments have been carried out on image four datasets as benchmark where we show REVEL's descriptive and analytical power.

With the rising need of interpretable machine learning methods, there is a necessity for a rise in human effort to provide diverse explanations of the influencing factors of the model decisions. To improve the trust and transparency of AI-based systems, the EXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) field has emerged. The XAI paradigm is bifurcated into two main categories: feature attribution and counterfactual explanation methods. While feature attribution methods are based on explaining the reason behind a model decision, counterfactual explanation methods discover the smallest input changes that will result in a different decision. In this paper, we aim at building trust and transparency in time series models by using motifs to generate counterfactual explanations. We propose Motif-Guided Counterfactual Explanation (MG-CF), a novel model that generates intuitive post-hoc counterfactual explanations that make full use of important motifs to provide interpretive information in decision-making processes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first effort that leverages motifs to guide the counterfactual explanation generation. We validated our model using five real-world time-series datasets from the UCR repository. Our experimental results show the superiority of MG-CF in balancing all the desirable counterfactual explanations properties in comparison with other competing state-of-the-art baselines.

Progress on many Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks, such as text classification, is driven by objective, reproducible and scalable evaluation via publicly available benchmarks. However, these are not always representative of real-world scenarios where text classifiers are employed, such as sentiment analysis or misinformation detection. In this position paper, we put forward two points that aim to alleviate this problem. First, we propose to extend text classification benchmarks to evaluate the explainability of text classifiers. We review challenges associated with objectively evaluating the capabilities to produce valid explanations which leads us to the second main point: We propose to ground these benchmarks in human-centred applications, for example by using social media, gamification or to learn explainability metrics from human judgements.

A major concern of Machine Learning (ML) models is their opacity. They are deployed in an increasing number of applications where they often operate as black boxes that do not provide explanations for their predictions. Among others, the potential harms associated with the lack of understanding of the models' rationales include privacy violations, adversarial manipulations, and unfair discrimination. As a result, the accountability and transparency of ML models have been posed as critical desiderata by works in policy and law, philosophy, and computer science. In computer science, the decision-making process of ML models has been studied by developing accountability and transparency methods. Accountability methods, such as adversarial attacks and diagnostic datasets, expose vulnerabilities of ML models that could lead to malicious manipulations or systematic faults in their predictions. Transparency methods explain the rationales behind models' predictions gaining the trust of relevant stakeholders and potentially uncovering mistakes and unfairness in models' decisions. To this end, transparency methods have to meet accountability requirements as well, e.g., being robust and faithful to the underlying rationales of a model. This thesis presents my research that expands our collective knowledge in the areas of accountability and transparency of ML models developed for complex reasoning tasks over text.

As Artificial intelligence (AI) is getting democratized across enterprises, it is slowly getting embedded in the fabric of our existence. An important aspect of this democratization is that end-users should be able to fully comprehend the process and mechanisms that AI is using to reach to a conclusion or how it is operating to deliver the desired outcomes. As human beings, we have a deep-rooted need to uncover the "why" and "how" of any phenomenon, which has accelerated our technological progress. In the context of AI, this understanding is termed as "explainability." More often than not, we approach AI as a "black box", where we only have awareness of the inputs and outputs, but somewhere the processes used are lost on us.

Despite extensive research efforts in recent years, computational argumentation (CA) remains one of the most challenging areas of natural language processing. The reason for this is the inherent complexity of the cognitive processes behind human argumentation, which integrate a plethora of different types of knowledge, ranging from topic-specific facts and common sense to rhetorical knowledge. The integration of knowledge from such a wide range in CA requires modeling capabilities far beyond many other natural language understanding tasks. Existing research on mining, assessing, reasoning over, and generating arguments largely acknowledges that much more knowledge is needed to accurately model argumentation computationally. However, a systematic overview of the types of knowledge introduced in existing CA models is missing, hindering targeted progress in the field. Adopting the operational definition of knowledge as any task-relevant normative information not provided as input, the survey paper at hand fills this gap by (1) proposing a taxonomy of types of knowledge required in CA tasks, (2) systematizing the large body of CA work according to the reliance on and exploitation of these knowledge types for the four main research areas in CA, and (3) outlining and discussing directions for future research efforts in CA.

While preference modelling is becoming one of the pillars of machine learning, the problem of preference explanation remains challenging and underexplored. In this paper, we propose \textsc{Pref-SHAP}, a Shapley value-based model explanation framework for pairwise comparison data. We derive the appropriate value functions for preference models and further extend the framework to model and explain \emph{context specific} information, such as the surface type in a tennis game. To demonstrate the utility of \textsc{Pref-SHAP}, we apply our method to a variety of synthetic and real-world datasets and show that richer and more insightful explanations can be obtained over the baseline.

Counterfactual explanations promote explainability in machine learning models by answering the question "how should an input instance be perturbed to obtain a desired predicted label?". The comparison of this instance before and after perturbation can enhance human interpretation. Most existing studies on counterfactual explanations are limited in tabular data or image data. In this work, we study the problem of counterfactual explanation generation on graphs. A few studies have explored counterfactual explanations on graphs, but many challenges of this problem are still not well-addressed: 1) optimizing in the discrete and disorganized space of graphs; 2) generalizing on unseen graphs; and 3) maintaining the causality in the generated counterfactuals without prior knowledge of the causal model. To tackle these challenges, we propose a novel framework CLEAR which aims to generate counterfactual explanations on graphs for graph-level prediction models. Specifically, CLEAR leverages a graph variational autoencoder based mechanism to facilitate its optimization and generalization, and promotes causality by leveraging an auxiliary variable to better identify the underlying causal model.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is transforming the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) by enhancing the trust of end-users in machines. As the number of connected devices keeps on growing, the Internet of Things (IoT) market needs to be trustworthy for the end-users. However, existing literature still lacks a systematic and comprehensive survey work on the use of XAI for IoT. To bridge this lacking, in this paper, we address the XAI frameworks with a focus on their characteristics and support for IoT. We illustrate the widely-used XAI services for IoT applications, such as security enhancement, Internet of Medical Things (IoMT), Industrial IoT (IIoT), and Internet of City Things (IoCT). We also suggest the implementation choice of XAI models over IoT systems in these applications with appropriate examples and summarize the key inferences for future works. Moreover, we present the cutting-edge development in edge XAI structures and the support of sixth-generation (6G) communication services for IoT applications, along with key inferences. In a nutshell, this paper constitutes the first holistic compilation on the development of XAI-based frameworks tailored for the demands of future IoT use cases.

Parametrized Quantum Circuits (PQCs) enable a novel method for machine learning (ML). However, from a computational point of view they present a challenge to existing eXplainable AI (xAI) methods. On the one hand, measurements on quantum circuits introduce probabilistic errors which impact the convergence of these methods. On the other hand, the phase space of a quantum circuit expands exponentially with the number of qubits, complicating efforts to execute xAI methods in polynomial time. In this paper we will discuss the performance of established xAI methods, such as Baseline SHAP and Integrated Gradients. Using the internal mechanics of PQCs we study ways to speed up their computation.