We study the computational complexity of abstract argumentation semantics based on  weak admissibility, a recently introduced concept to deal with arguments of self-defeating  nature. Our results reveal that semantics based on weak admissibility are of much higher  complexity (under typical assumptions) compared to all argumentation semantics which  have been analysed in terms of complexity so far. In fact, we show PSPACE-completeness  of all non-trivial standard decision problems for weak-admissible based semantics. We then  investigate potential tractable fragments and show that restricting the frameworks under  consideration to certain graph-classes significantly reduces the complexity. We also show  that weak-admissibility based extensions can be computed by dividing the given graph into  its strongly connected components (SCCs). This technique ensures that the bottleneck  when computing extensions is the size of the largest SCC instead of the size of the graph  itself and therefore contributes to the search for fixed-parameter tractable implementations  for reasoning with weak admissibility. 

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, all common approaches from this field are based on communicating information about features or characteristics that are especially important for an AI's decision. We argue that in order to fully understand a decision, not only knowledge about relevant features is needed, but that the awareness of irrelevant information also highly contributes to the creation of a user's mental model of an AI system. Therefore, we introduce a new way of explaining AI systems. Our approach, which we call Alterfactual Explanations, 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 characteristics of the input data can change arbitrarily without influencing the AI's decision. We evaluate our approach in an extensive user study, revealing that it is able to significantly contribute to the participants' understanding of an AI. We show that alterfactual explanations are suited to convey an understanding of different aspects of the AI's reasoning than established counterfactual explanation methods.

Traditionally, a debate usually requires a manual preparation process, including reading plenty of articles, selecting the claims, identifying the stances of the claims, seeking the evidence for the claims, etc. As the AI debate attracts more attention these years, it is worth exploring the methods to automate the tedious process involved in the debating system. In this work, we introduce a comprehensive and large dataset named IAM, which can be applied to a series of argument mining tasks, including claim extraction, stance classification, evidence extraction, etc. Our dataset is collected from over 1k articles related to 123 topics. Near 70k sentences in the dataset are fully annotated based on their argument properties (e.g., claims, stances, evidence, etc.). We further propose two new integrated argument mining tasks associated with the debate preparation process: (1) claim extraction with stance classification (CESC) and (2) claim-evidence pair extraction (CEPE). We adopt a pipeline approach and an end-to-end method for each integrated task separately. Promising experimental results are reported to show the values and challenges of our proposed tasks, and motivate future research on argument mining.

Deep learning models used in medical image analysis are prone to raising reliability concerns due to their black-box nature. To shed light on these black-box models, previous works predominantly focus on identifying the contribution of input features to the diagnosis, i.e., feature attribution. In this work, we explore counterfactual explanations to identify what patterns the models rely on for diagnosis. Specifically, we investigate the effect of changing features within chest X-rays on the classifier's output to understand its decision mechanism. We leverage a StyleGAN-based approach (StyleEx) to create counterfactual explanations for chest X-rays by manipulating specific latent directions in their latent space. In addition, we propose EigenFind to significantly reduce the computation time of generated explanations. We clinically evaluate the relevancy of our counterfactual explanations with the help of radiologists. Our code is publicly available.

Modern Artificial Intelligence (AI) enabled Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) are complex black boxes. This means that a security analyst will have little to no explanation or clarification on why an IDS model made a particular prediction. A potential solution to this problem is to research and develop Explainable Intrusion Detection Systems (X-IDS) based on current capabilities in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). In this paper, we create a Self Organizing Maps (SOMs) based X-IDS system that is capable of producing explanatory visualizations. We leverage SOM's explainability to create both global and local explanations. An analyst can use global explanations to get a general idea of how a particular IDS model computes predictions. Local explanations are generated for individual datapoints to explain why a certain prediction value was computed. Furthermore, our SOM based X-IDS was evaluated on both explanation generation and traditional accuracy tests using the NSL-KDD and the CIC-IDS-2017 datasets.

The application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) to cybersecurity challenges has gained traction in industry and academia, partially as a result of widespread malware attacks on critical systems such as cloud infrastructures and government institutions. Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), using some forms of AI, have received widespread adoption due to their ability to handle vast amounts of data with a high prediction accuracy. These systems are hosted in the organizational Cyber Security Operation Center (CSoC) as a defense tool to monitor and detect malicious network flow that would otherwise impact the Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability (CIA). CSoC analysts rely on these systems to make decisions about the detected threats. However, IDSs designed using Deep Learning (DL) techniques are often treated as black box models and do not provide a justification for their predictions. This creates a barrier for CSoC analysts, as they are unable to improve their decisions based on the model's predictions. One solution to this problem is to design explainable IDS (X-IDS). This survey reviews the state-of-the-art in explainable AI (XAI) for IDS, its current challenges, and discusses how these challenges span to the design of an X-IDS. In particular, we discuss black box and white box approaches comprehensively. We also present the tradeoff between these approaches in terms of their performance and ability to produce explanations. Furthermore, we propose a generic architecture that considers human-in-the-loop which can be used as a guideline when designing an X-IDS. Research recommendations are given from three critical viewpoints: the need to define explainability for IDS, the need to create explanations tailored to various stakeholders, and the need to design metrics to evaluate explanations.

Artificial intelligence has become pervasive across disciplines and fields, and biomedical image and signal processing is no exception. The growing and widespread interest on the topic has triggered a vast research activity that is reflected in an exponential research effort. Through study of massive and diverse biomedical data, machine and deep learning models have revolutionized various tasks such as modeling, segmentation, registration, classification and synthesis, outperforming traditional techniques. However, the difficulty in translating the results into biologically/clinically interpretable information is preventing their full exploitation in the field. Explainable AI (XAI) attempts to fill this translational gap by providing means to make the models interpretable and providing explanations. Different solutions have been proposed so far and are gaining increasing interest from the community. This paper aims at providing an overview on XAI in biomedical data processing and points to an upcoming Special Issue on Deep Learning in Biomedical Image and Signal Processing of the IEEE Signal Processing Magazine that is going to appear in March 2022.

When using medical images for diagnosis, either by clinicians or artificial intelligence (AI) systems, it is important that the images are of high quality. When an image is of low quality, the medical exam that produced the image often needs to be redone. In telemedicine, a common problem is that the quality issue is only flagged once the patient has left the clinic, meaning they must return in order to have the exam redone. This can be especially difficult for people living in remote regions, who make up a substantial portion of the patients at Portal Telemedicina, a digital healthcare organization based in Brazil. In this paper, we report on ongoing work regarding (i) the development of an AI system for flagging and explaining low-quality medical images in real-time, (ii) an interview study to understand the explanation needs of stakeholders using the AI system at OurCompany, and, (iii) a longitudinal user study design to examine the effect of including explanations on the workflow of the technicians in our clinics. To the best of our knowledge, this would be the first longitudinal study on evaluating the effects of XAI methods on end-users -- stakeholders that use AI systems but do not have AI-specific expertise. We welcome feedback and suggestions on our experimental setup.

Dr. Michael Bussmann (DE) kicked off the session with his pre-recorded presentation "Basics of explainable artificial intelligence with applications in PCa". He stated that AI currently mimics human intelligence but to advance, explainable AI needs lots of data to create value. Diverse, big and high-quality data is key to successful AI building, this data needs to be complex and unstructured. According to Dr. Bussmann, great prospects of explainable AI in PCa include, but are not limited to classification of prostate tumours with MRI, PCa detection, Gleason Score grading, risk stratification, lesion detection, biochemical recurrence, and robotic surgery. Dr. Bussmann also shed light on the big potential of synthetic data.

Recently, Strength-based Argumentation Frameworks (StrAFs) have been proposed to model situations where some quantitative strength is associated with arguments. In this setting, the notion of accrual corresponds to sets of arguments that collectively attack an argument. Some semantics have already been defined, which are sensitive to the existence of accruals that collectively defeat their target, while their individual elements cannot. However, until now, only the surface of this framework and semantics have been studied. Indeed, the existing literature focuses on the adaptation of the stable semantics to StrAFs. In this paper, we push forward the study and investigate the adaptation of admissibility-based semantics. Especially, we show that the strong admissibility defined in the literature does not satisfy a desirable property, namely Dung's fundamental lemma. We therefore propose an alternative definition that induces semantics that behave as expected. We then study computational issues for these new semantics, in particular we show that complexity of reasoning is similar to the complexity of the corresponding decision problems for standard argumentation frameworks in almost all cases. We then propose a translation in pseudo-Boolean constraints for computing (strong and weak) extensions. We conclude with an experimental evaluation of our approach which shows in particular that it scales up well for solving the problem of providing one extension as well as enumerating them all.