Mutual understanding of artificial agents' decisions is key to ensuring a trustworthy and successful human-robot interaction. Hence, robots are expected to make reasonable decisions and communicate them to humans when needed. In this article, the focus is on an approach to modeling and reasoning about the comparison of two competing plans, so that robots can later explain the divergent result. First, a novel ontological model is proposed to formalize and reason about the differences between competing plans, enabling the classification of the most appropriate one (e.g., the shortest, the safest, the closest to human preferences, etc.). This work also investigates the limitations of a baseline algorithm for ontology-based explanatory narration. To address these limitations, a novel algorithm is presented, leveraging divergent knowledge between plans and facilitating the construction of contrastive narratives. Through empirical evaluation, it is observed that the explanations excel beyond the baseline method.

We present a machine learning pipeline for biomarker discovery in Multiple Sclerosis (MS), integrating eight publicly available microarray datasets from Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMC). After robust preprocessing we trained an XGBoost classifier optimized via Bayesian search. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were used to identify key features for model prediction, indicating thus possible biomarkers. These were compared with genes identified through classical Differential Expression Analysis (DEA). Our comparison revealed both overlapping and unique biomarkers between SHAP and DEA, suggesting complementary strengths. Enrichment analysis confirmed the biological relevance of SHAP-selected genes, linking them to pathways such as sphingolipid signaling, Th1/Th2/Th17 cell differentiation, and Epstein-Barr virus infection--all known to be associated with MS. This study highlights the value of combining explainable AI (xAI) with traditional statistical methods to gain deeper insights into disease mechanism.

Language Models (LMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing and enabled remarkable progress across diverse domains, yet their black-box nature raises critical concerns about the interpretability of their internal mechanisms and decision-making processes. This lack of transparency is particularly problematic for adoption in high-stakes domains, where stakeholders need to understand the rationale behind model outputs to ensure accountability. On the other hand, while explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods have been well studied for non-LMs, they face many limitations when applied to LMs due to their complex architectures, considerable training corpora, and broad generalization abilities. Although various surveys have examined XAI in the context of LMs, they often fail to capture the distinct challenges arising from the architectural diversity and evolving capabilities of these models. To bridge this gap, this survey presents a comprehensive review of XAI techniques with a particular emphasis on LMs, organizing them according to their underlying transformer architectures: encoder-only, decoder-only, and encoder-decoder, and analyzing how methods are adapted to each while assessing their respective strengths and limitations. Furthermore, we evaluate these techniques through the dual lenses of plausibility and faithfulness, offering a structured perspective on their effectiveness. Finally, we identify open research challenges and outline promising future directions, aiming to guide ongoing efforts toward the development of robust, transparent, and interpretable XAI methods for LMs.

Things to Do in L.A. Tap to enable a layout that focuses on the article. 'No smoking gun': Why Eaton fire report didn't name names or assign blame A resident tries to defend his home from nearby flames during the Eaton fire in Altadena. This is read by an automated voice. Please report any issues or inconsistencies here . A $2-million county report examined botched Eaton fire evacuation alerts but stopped short of naming officials or assigning individual blame.

Counterfactual explanation (CE) is a widely used post-hoc method that provides individuals with actionable changes to alter an unfavorable prediction from a machine learning model. Plausible CE methods improve realism by considering data distribution characteristics, but their optimization models introduce a large number of constraints, leading to high computational cost. In this work, we revisit the DACE framework and propose a refined Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) formulation that significantly reduces the number of constraints in the local outlier factor (LOF) objective component. We also apply the method to a linear SVM classifier with standard scaler. The experimental results show that our approach achieves faster solving times while maintaining explanation quality. These results demonstrate the promise of more efficient LOF modeling in counterfactual explanation and data science applications.

This paper presents a formal approach to explaining change of inference in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). When drawing conclusions from a QBAF and updating the QBAF to then again draw conclusions (and so on), our approach traces changes -- which we call strength inconsistencies -- in the partial order over argument strengths that a semantics establishes on some arguments of interest, called topic arguments. We trace the causes of strength inconsistencies to specific arguments, which then serve as explanations. We identify sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations for strength inconsistencies and show that strength inconsistency explanations exist if and only if an update leads to strength inconsistency. We define a heuristic-based approach to facilitate the search for strength inconsistency explanations, for which we also provide an implementation.

This study deploys methods in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), e.g. decision trees and Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC), to investigate electricity usage in multiple locales. It addresses the vital issue of energy burden, i.e. total amount spent on energy divided by median household income. Socio-demographic data is analyzed with energy features, especially using decision trees and PCC, providing explainable predictors on factors affecting energy burden. Based on the results of the analysis, a pilot energy equity web portal is designed along with a novel energy burden calculator. Leveraging XAI, this portal (with its calculator) serves as a prototype information system that can offer tailored actionable advice to multiple energy stakeholders. The ultimate goal of this study is to promote greater energy equity through the adaptation of XAI methods for energy-related analysis with suitable recommendations.

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into medicine is remarkable, offering advanced diagnostic and therapeutic possibilities. However, the inherent opacity of complex AI models presents significant challenges to their clinical practicality. This paper focuses primarily on investigating the application of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods, with the aim of making AI decisions transparent and interpretable. Our research focuses on implementing simulations using various medical datasets to elucidate the internal workings of the XAI model. These dataset-driven simulations demonstrate how XAI effectively interprets AI predictions, thus improving the decision-making process for healthcare professionals. In addition to a survey of the main XAI methods and simulations, ongoing challenges in the XAI field are discussed. The study highlights the need for the continuous development and exploration of XAI, particularly from the perspective of diverse medical datasets, to promote its adoption and effectiveness in the healthcare domain.

Workforce management is a complex problem involving the optimisation of the makespan and travel distance required for a team of operators to complete a set of jobs, using a set of instruments. A crucial challenge in workforce management is accommodating changes at execution time so that explanations are provided to all stakeholders involved. Here, we show that, by understanding workforce management as abstract argumentation in an industrial application, we can accommodate change and obtain faithful explanations. We show, with a user study, that our tool and explanations lead to faster and more accurate problem solving than conventional manual approaches.

AI-powered code assistants are widely used to generate code completions, significantly boosting developer productivity. However, these tools typically present suggestions without explaining their rationale, leaving their decision-making process inscrutable. This opacity hinders developers' ability to critically evaluate outputs, form accurate mental models, and calibrate trust in the system. To address this, we introduce CopilotLens, a novel interactive framework that reframes code completion from a simple suggestion into a transparent, explainable interaction. CopilotLens operates as an explanation layer that reconstructs the AI agent's "thought process" through a dynamic, two-level interface. The tool aims to surface both high-level code changes and the specific codebase context influences. This paper presents the design and rationale of CopilotLens, offering a concrete framework and articulating expectations on deepening comprehension and calibrated trust, which we plan to evaluate in subsequent work.