A state-of-the-art systematic review on XAI applied to Prognostic and Health Management (PHM) of industrial asset is presented. The work attempts to provide an overview of the general trend of XAI in PHM, answers the question of accuracy versus explainability, investigates the extent of human role, explainability evaluation and uncertainty management in PHM XAI. Research articles linked to PHM XAI, in English language, from 2015 to 2021 are selected from IEEE Xplore, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, ACM Digital Library and Scopus databases using PRISMA guidelines. Data was extracted from 35 selected articles and examined using MS. Excel. Several findings were synthesized. Firstly, while the discipline is still young, the analysis indicates the growing acceptance of XAI in PHM domain. Secondly, XAI functions as a double edge sword, where it is assimilated as a tool to execute PHM tasks as well as a mean of explanation, in particular in diagnostic and anomaly detection. There is thus a need for XAI in PHM. Thirdly, the review shows that PHM XAI papers produce either good or excellent results in general, suggesting that PHM performance is unaffected by XAI. Fourthly, human role, explainability metrics and uncertainty management are areas requiring further attention by the PHM community. Adequate explainability metrics to cater for PHM need are urgently needed. Finally, most case study featured on the accepted articles are based on real, indicating that available AI and XAI approaches are equipped to solve complex real-world challenges, increasing the confidence of AI model adoption in the industry. This work is funded by the Universiti Teknologi Petronas Foundation.

(ZAC), the pioneer Cognitive Explainable-AI (Artificial Intelligence) (Cognitive XAI) software startup, has made AI and Machine Learning (ML) …

Z Advanced Computing, Inc. (ZAC), the pioneer Cognitive Explainable-AI (Artificial Intelligence) (Cognitive XAI) software startup, has made AI and Machine Learning (ML) breakthroughs: ZAC has achieved 3D Image Recognition using only a few training samples, and using only an average laptop with low power CPU, for both training and recognition, for the US Air Force (USAF). This is in sharp contrast to the other algorithms in industry that require thousands to billions of samples, being trained on large GPU servers. "ZAC requires much less computing power and much less electrical power to run, which is great for mobile and edge computing, as well as environment, with less Carbon footprint," emphasized Dr. Saied Tadayon, CTO of ZAC. ZAC is the first to demonstrate the novel and superior algorithms Cognition-based Explainable-AI (XAI), where various attributes and details of 3D (three dimensional) objects are recognized from any view or angle. "You cannot do this task with the other algorithms, such as Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) or ResNets, even with an extremely large number of training samples, on GPU servers. That's basically hitting the limitations of CNNs or Neural Nets, which all other companies are using now," said Dr. Bijan Tadayon, CEO of ZAC.

In this paper we discuss contrastive explanations for formal argumentation - the question why a certain argument (the fact) can be accepted, whilst another argument (the foil) cannot be accepted under various extension-based semantics. The recent work on explanations for argumentation-based conclusions has mostly focused on providing minimal explanations for the (non-)acceptance of arguments. What is still lacking, however, is a proper argumentation-based interpretation of contrastive explanations. We show under which conditions contrastive explanations in abstract and structured argumentation are meaningful, and how argumentation allows us to make implicit foils explicit.

Over the last few years there has been rapid research growth into eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) and the closely aligned Interpretable Machine Learning (IML). Drivers for this growth include recent legislative changes and increased investments by industry and governments, along with increased concern from the general public. People are affected by autonomous decisions every day and the public need to understand the decision-making process to accept the outcomes. However, the vast majority of the applications of XAI/IML are focused on providing low-level `narrow' explanations of how an individual decision was reached based on a particular datum. While important, these explanations rarely provide insights into an agent's: beliefs and motivations; hypotheses of other (human, animal or AI) agents' intentions; interpretation of external cultural expectations; or, processes used to generate its own explanation. Yet all of these factors, we propose, are essential to providing the explanatory depth that people require to accept and trust the AI's decision-making. This paper aims to define levels of explanation and describe how they can be integrated to create a human-aligned conversational explanation system. In so doing, this paper will survey current approaches and discuss the integration of different technologies to achieve these levels with Broad eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (Broad-XAI), and thereby move towards high-level `strong' explanations.

Even as the search continues over a week later for signs of life in the mangled debris of the fallen Champlain Towers South, the process of seeking answers about why it happened and who is to blame is already underway in Florida's legal system. Authorities have opened criminal and civil investigations into the collapse of the oceanfront condominium building, which left at least 28 confirmed dead and more than 117 unaccounted for. Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle pledged to bring the matter soon before grand jurors, who could recommend criminal charges or simply investigate the cause to suggest reforms. And at least five lawsuits have been filed on behalf of residents who survived or are feared dead. One lawyer involved in the litigation said the collapse raises widespread concerns about infrastructure issues and the trust we put in those responsible for them.

Methods to find counterfactual explanations have predominantly focused on one step decision making processes. In this work, we initiate the development of methods to find counterfactual explanations for decision making processes in which multiple, dependent actions are taken sequentially over time. We start by formally characterizing a sequence of actions and states using finite horizon Markov decision processes and the Gumbel-Max structural causal model. Building upon this characterization, we formally state the problem of finding counterfactual explanations for sequential decision making processes. In our problem formulation, the counterfactual explanation specifies an alternative sequence of actions differing in at most k actions from the observed sequence that could have led the observed process realization to a better outcome. Then, we introduce a polynomial time algorithm based on dynamic programming to build a counterfactual policy that is guaranteed to always provide the optimal counterfactual explanation on every possible realization of the counterfactual environment dynamics. We validate our algorithm using both synthetic and real data from cognitive behavioral therapy and show that the counterfactual explanations our algorithm finds can provide valuable insights to enhance sequential decision making under uncertainty.

The implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems in the manufacturing domain enables higher production efficiency, outstanding performance, and safer operations, leveraging powerful tools such as deep learning and reinforcement learning techniques. Despite the high accuracy of these models, they are mostly considered black boxes: they are unintelligible to the human. Opaqueness affects trust in the system, a factor that is critical in the context of decision-making. We present an overview of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques as a means of boosting the transparency of models. We analyze different metrics to evaluate these techniques and describe several application scenarios in the manufacturing domain.

ABSTRACT Typical state of the art flow cytometry data samples consists of measures of more than 100.000 cells in 10 or more features. AI systems are able to diagnose such data with almost the same accuracy as human experts. However, there is one central challenge in such systems: their decisions have far-reaching consequences for the health and life of people, and therefore, the decisions of AI systems need to be understandable and justifiable by humans. In this work, we present a novel explainable AI method, called ALPODS, which is able to classify (diagnose) cases based on clusters, i.e., subpopulations, in the high-dimensional data. ALPODS is able to explain its decisions in a form that is understandable for human experts. For the identified subpopulations, fuzzy reasoning rules expressed in the typical language of domain experts are generated. A visualization method based on these rules allows human experts to understand the reasoning used by the AI system. A comparison to a selection of state of the art explainable AI systems shows that ALPODS operates efficiently on known benchmark data and also on everyday routine case data. KEYWORDS: Explainable AI, Expert System, Symbolic System, Biomedical Data 1. INTRODUCTION State of the art machine learning (ML) artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms are effectively and efficiently able to diagnose (classify) high-dimensional data sets in modern medicine, e.g., for multiparameter flow cytometry data [Hu et al., 2019; Zhao et al., 2020]. These are systems that, after a training (learning) phase using learning data, perform well on data that are not part of the training data, i.e., the test data. This is called supervised learning [Murphy, 2012].

This paper applies t-SNE, a visualisation technique familiar from Deep Neural Network research to argumentation graphs by applying it to the output of graph embeddings generated using several different methods. It shows that such a visualisation approach can work for argumentation and show interesting structural properties of argumentation graphs, opening up paths for further research in the area.