The first industrial revolution witnessed the birth of steam- and water-powered technology, and now, almost two centuries later, humanity has come a long way and is now experiencing its fourth industrial revolution, otherwise known as industry 4.0. To ramp up the speed of the revolution, experts believe that AI and XAI will play an essential role. Industry 4.0 is centre around enhancing industrial efficiency, utilising technologies such as the internet of things (IoT), cloud computing, cyber-physical systems, and AI. AI is the predominant driver of industry 4.0, automating intelligent systems to self-monitor, interpret, diagnose, and analyse by themselves. AI systems such as machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), natural language processing (NLP), and computer vision (CV) will enable industries to estimate their maintenance needs and become more efficient.

A semantic tableau method, called an argumentation tableau, that enables the derivation of arguments, is proposed. First, the derivation of arguments for standard propositional and predicate logic is addressed. Next, an extension that enables reasoning with defeasible rules is presented. Finally, reasoning by cases using an argumentation tableau is discussed.

Explainability techniques for data-driven predictive models based on artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms allow us to better understand the operation of such systems and help to hold them accountable. New transparency approaches are developed at breakneck speed, enabling us to peek inside these black boxes and interpret their decisions. Many of these techniques are introduced as monolithic tools, giving the impression of one-size-fits-all and end-to-end algorithms with limited customisability. Nevertheless, such approaches are often composed of multiple interchangeable modules that need to be tuned to the problem at hand to produce meaningful explanations. This paper introduces a collection of hands-on training materials -- slides, video recordings and Jupyter Notebooks -- that provide guidance through the process of building and evaluating bespoke modular surrogate explainers for tabular data. These resources cover the three core building blocks of this technique: interpretable representation composition, data sampling and explanation generation.

Recent advances in machine learning have led to growing interest in Explainable AI (xAI) to enable humans to gain insight into the decision-making of machine learning models. Despite this recent interest, the utility of xAI techniques has not yet been characterized in human-machine teaming. Importantly, xAI offers the promise of enhancing team situational awareness (SA) and shared mental model development, which are the key characteristics of effective human-machine teams. Rapidly developing such mental models is especially critical in ad hoc human-machine teaming, where agents do not have a priori knowledge of others' decision-making strategies. In this paper, we present two novel human-subject experiments quantifying the benefits of deploying xAI techniques within a human-machine teaming scenario. First, we show that xAI techniques can support SA ($p<0.05)$. Second, we examine how different SA levels induced via a collaborative AI policy abstraction affect ad hoc human-machine teaming performance. Importantly, we find that the benefits of xAI are not universal, as there is a strong dependence on the composition of the human-machine team. Novices benefit from xAI providing increased SA ($p<0.05$) but are susceptible to cognitive overhead ($p<0.05$). On the other hand, expert performance degrades with the addition of xAI-based support ($p<0.05$), indicating that the cost of paying attention to the xAI outweighs the benefits obtained from being provided additional information to enhance SA. Our results demonstrate that researchers must deliberately design and deploy the right xAI techniques in the right scenario by carefully considering human-machine team composition and how the xAI method augments SA.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods are intended to help human users better understand the decision making of an AI agent. However, many modern XAI approaches are unintuitive to end users, particularly those without prior AI or ML knowledge. In this paper, we present a novel XAI approach we call Responsibility that identifies the most responsible training example for a particular decision. This example can then be shown as an explanation: "this is what I (the AI) learned that led me to do that". We present experimental results across a number of domains along with the results of an Amazon Mechanical Turk user study, comparing responsibility and existing XAI methods on an image classification task. Our results demonstrate that responsibility can help improve accuracy for both human end users and secondary ML models.

As AI is more and more pervasive in everyday life, humans have an increasing demand to understand its behavior and decisions. Most research on explainable AI builds on the premise that there is one ideal explanation to be found. In fact, however, everyday explanations are co-constructed in a dialogue between the person explaining (the explainer) and the specific person being explained to (the explainee). In this paper, we introduce a first corpus of dialogical explanations to enable NLP research on how humans explain as well as on how AI can learn to imitate this process. The corpus consists of 65 transcribed English dialogues from the Wired video series \emph{5 Levels}, explaining 13 topics to five explainees of different proficiency. All 1550 dialogue turns have been manually labeled by five independent professionals for the topic discussed as well as for the dialogue act and the explanation move performed. We analyze linguistic patterns of explainers and explainees, and we explore differences across proficiency levels. BERT-based baseline results indicate that sequence information helps predicting topics, acts, and moves effectively

Artificial intelligence (AI) can be trained to recognise whether a tissue image contains a tumour. However, exactly how it makes its decision has remained a mystery until now. A team from the Research Center for Protein Diagnostics (PRODI) at Ruhr-Universität Bochum is developing a new approach that will render an AI's decision transparent and thus trustworthy. The researchers led by Professor Axel Mosig describe the approach in the journal Medical Image Analysis. For the study, bioinformatics scientist Axel Mosig cooperated with Professor Andrea Tannapfel, head of the Institute of Pathology, oncologist Professor Anke Reinacher-Schick from the Ruhr-Universität's St. Josef Hospital, and biophysicist and PRODI founding director Professor Klaus Gerwert. The group developed a neural network, i.e. an AI, that can classify whether a tissue sample contains tumour or not.

Artificial intelligence (AI) can be trained to recognise whether a tissue image contains a tumour. However, exactly how it makes its decision has remained a mystery until now. A team from the Research Center for Protein Diagnostics (PRODI) at Ruhr-Universität Bochum is developing a new approach that will render an AI's decision transparent and thus trustworthy. The researchers led by Professor Axel Mosig describe the approach in the journal "Medical Image Analysis", published online on 24 August 2022. For the study, bioinformatics scientist Axel Mosig cooperated with Professor Andrea Tannapfel, head of the Institute of Pathology, oncologist Professor Anke Reinacher-Schick from the Ruhr-Universität's St. Josef Hospital, and biophysicist and PRODI founding director Professor Klaus Gerwert.

For the study, bioinformatics scientist Axel Mosig cooperated with Professor Andrea Tannapfel, head of the Institute of Pathology, oncologist Professor Anke Reinacher-Schick from the Ruhr-Universität's St. Josef Hospital, and biophysicist and PRODI founding director Professor Klaus Gerwert. The group developed a neural network, i.e. an AI, that can classify whether a tissue sample contains tumour or not. To this end, they fed the AI a large number of microscopic tissue images, some of which contained tumours, while others were tumour-free. "Neural networks are initially a black box: it's unclear which identifying features a network learns from the training data," explains Axel Mosig. Unlike human experts, they lack the ability to explain their decisions. "However, for medical applications in particular, it's important that the AI is capable of explanation and thus trustworthy," adds bioinformatics scientist David Schuhmacher, who collaborated on the study.

XAI with natural language processing aims to produce human-readable explanations as evidence for AI decision-making, which addresses explainability and transparency. However, from an HCI perspective, the current approaches only focus on delivering a single explanation, which fails to account for the diversity of human thoughts and experiences in language. This paper thus addresses this gap, by proposing a generative XAI framework, INTERACTION (explaIn aNd predicT thEn queRy with contextuAl CondiTional varIational autO-eNcoder). Our novel framework presents explanation in two steps: (step one) Explanation and Label Prediction; and (step two) Diverse Evidence Generation. We conduct intensive experiments with the Transformer architecture on a benchmark dataset, e-SNLI. Our method achieves competitive or better performance against state-of-the-art baseline models on explanation generation (up to 4.7% gain in BLEU) and prediction (up to 4.4% gain in accuracy) in step one; it can also generate multiple diverse explanations in step two.