With the rise of fifth-generation (5G) networks in critical applications, it is urgent to move from detection of malicious activity to systems capable of providing a reliable verdict suitable for mitigation. In this regard, understanding and interpreting machine learning (ML) models' security alerts is crucial for enabling actionable incident response orchestration. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques are expected to enhance trust by providing insights into why alerts are raised. A dominant approach statistically associates feature sets that can be correlated to a given alert. This paper starts by questioning whether such attribution is relevant for future generation communication systems, and investigates its merits in comparison with an approach based on logical explanations. We extensively study two methods, SHAP and VoTE-XAI, by analyzing their interpretations of alerts generated by an XGBoost model in three different use cases with several 5G communication attacks. We identify three metrics for assessing explanations: sparsity, how concise they are; stability, how consistent they are across samples from the same attack type; and efficiency, how fast an explanation is generated. As an example, in a 5G network with 92 features, 6 were deemed important by VoTE-XAI for a Denial of Service (DoS) variant, ICMPFlood, while SHAP identified over 20. More importantly, we found a significant divergence between features selected by SHAP and VoTE-XAI. However, none of the top-ranked features selected by SHAP were missed by VoTE-XAI. When it comes to efficiency of providing interpretations, we found that VoTE-XAI is significantly more responsive, e.g. it provides a single explanation in under 0.002 seconds, in a high-dimensional setting (478 features).

Explainable AI has become a common term in the literature, scrutinized by computer scientists and statisticians and highlighted by psychological or philosophical researchers. One major effort many researchers tackle is constructing general guidelines for XAI schemes, which we derived from our study. While some areas of XAI are well studied, we focus on uncertainty explanations and consider global explanations, which are often left out. We chose an algorithm that covers various concepts simultaneously, such as uncertainty, robustness, and global XAI, and tested its ability to calibrate trust. We then checked whether an algorithm that aims to provide more of an intuitive visual understanding, despite being complicated to understand, can provide higher user satisfaction and human interpretability.

Machine learning models in dynamic environments often suffer from concept drift, where changes in the data distribution degrade performance. While detecting this drift is a well-studied topic, explaining how and why the model's decision-making logic changes still remains a significant challenge. In this paper, we introduce a novel methodology to explain concept drift by analyzing the temporal evolution of group-based counterfactual explanations (GCEs). Our approach tracks shifts in the GCEs' cluster centroids and their associated counterfactual action vectors before and after a drift. These evolving GCEs act as an interpretable proxy, revealing structural changes in the model's decision boundary and its underlying rationale. We operationalize this analysis within a three-layer framework that synergistically combines insights from the data layer (distributional shifts), the model layer (prediction disagreement), and our proposed explanation layer. We show that such holistic view allows for a more comprehensive diagnosis of drift, making it possible to distinguish between different root causes, such as a spatial data shift versus a re-labeling of concepts.

The diffusion MRI Neurite Exchange Imaging model offers a promising framework for probing gray matter microstructure by estimating parameters such as compartment sizes, diffusivities, and inter-compartmental water exchange time. However, existing protocols require long scan times. This study proposes a reduced acquisition scheme for the Connectome 2.0 scanner that preserves model accuracy while substantially shortening scan duration. We developed a data-driven framework using explainable artificial intelligence with a guided recursive feature elimination strategy to identify an optimal 8-feature subset from a 15-feature protocol. The performance of this optimized protocol was validated in vivo and benchmarked against the full acquisition and alternative reduction strategies. Parameter accuracy, preservation of anatomical contrast, and test-retest reproducibility were assessed. The reduced protocol yielded parameter estimates and cortical maps comparable to the full protocol, with low estimation errors in synthetic data and minimal impact on test-retest variability. Compared to theory-driven and heuristic reduction schemes, the optimized protocol demonstrated superior robustness, reducing the deviation in water exchange time estimates by over two-fold. In conclusion, this hybrid optimization framework enables viable imaging of neurite exchange in 14 minutes without loss of parameter fidelity. This approach supports the broader application of exchange-sensitive diffusion magnetic resonance imaging in neuroscience and clinical research, and offers a generalizable method for designing efficient acquisition protocols in biophysical parameter mapping.

Explanations are crucial for building trustworthy AI systems, but a gap often exists between the explanations provided by models and those needed by users. To address this gap, we introduce MetaExplainer, a neuro-symbolic framework designed to generate user-centered explanations. Our approach employs a three-stage process: first, we decompose user questions into machine-readable formats using state-of-the-art large language models (LLM); second, we delegate the task of generating system recommendations to model explainer methods; and finally, we synthesize natural language explanations that summarize the explainer outputs. Throughout this process, we utilize an Explanation Ontology to guide the language models and explainer methods. By leveraging LLMs and a structured approach to explanation generation, MetaExplainer aims to enhance the interpretability and trustworthiness of AI systems across various applications, providing users with tailored, question-driven explanations that better meet their needs. Comprehensive evaluations of MetaExplainer demonstrate a step towards evaluating and utilizing current state-of-the-art explanation frameworks. Our results show high performance across all stages, with a 59.06% F1-score in question reframing, 70% faithfulness in model explanations, and 67% context-utilization in natural language synthesis. User studies corroborate these findings, highlighting the creativity and comprehensiveness of generated explanations. Tested on the Diabetes (PIMA Indian) tabular dataset, MetaExplainer supports diverse explanation types, including Contrastive, Counterfactual, Rationale, Case-Based, and Data explanations. The framework's versatility and traceability from using ontology to guide LLMs suggest broad applicability beyond the tested scenarios, positioning MetaExplainer as a promising tool for enhancing AI explainability across various domains.

Explainability is a critical tool in helping stakeholders understand robots. In particular, the ability for robots to explain why they have made a particular decision or behaved in a certain way is useful in this regard. Behaviour trees are a popular framework for controlling the decision-making of robots and other software systems, and thus a natural question to ask is whether or not a system driven by a behaviour tree is capable of answering "why" questions. While explainability for behaviour trees has seen some prior attention, no existing methods are capable of generating causal, counterfactual explanations which detail the reasons for robot decisions and behaviour. Therefore, in this work, we introduce a novel approach which automatically generates counterfactual explanations in response to contrastive "why" questions. Our method achieves this by first automatically building a causal model from the structure of the behaviour tree as well as domain knowledge about the state and individual behaviour tree nodes. The resultant causal model is then queried and searched to find a set of diverse counterfactual explanations. We demonstrate that our approach is able to correctly explain the behaviour of a wide range of behaviour tree structures and states. By being able to answer a wide range of causal queries, our approach represents a step towards more transparent, understandable and ultimately trustworthy robotic systems.

Traditional Artificial Intelligence (AI) approaches in cybersecurity exhibit fundamental limitations: inadequate conceptual grounding leading to non-robustness against novel attacks; limited instructibility impeding analyst-guided adaptation; and misalignment with cybersecurity objectives. Neuro-Symbolic (NeSy) AI has emerged with the potential to revolutionize cybersecurity AI. However, there is no systematic understanding of this emerging approach. These hybrid systems address critical cybersecurity challenges by combining neural pattern recognition with symbolic reasoning, enabling enhanced threat understanding while introducing concerning autonomous offensive capabilities that reshape threat landscapes. In this survey, we systematically characterize this field by analyzing 127 publications spanning 2019-July 2025. We introduce a Grounding-Instructibility-Alignment (G-I-A) framework to evaluate these systems, focusing on both cyber defense and cyber offense across network security, malware analysis, and cyber operations. Our analysis shows advantages of multi-agent NeSy architectures and identifies critical implementation challenges including standardization gaps, computational complexity, and human-AI collaboration requirements that constrain deployment. We show that causal reasoning integration is the most transformative advancement, enabling proactive defense beyond correlation-based approaches. Our findings highlight dual-use implications where autonomous systems demonstrate substantial capabilities in zero-day exploitation while achieving significant cost reductions, altering threat dynamics. We provide insights and future research directions, emphasizing the urgent need for community-driven standardization frameworks and responsible development practices that ensure advancement serves defensive cybersecurity objectives while maintaining societal alignment.

Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT -5, GEMINI, Claude, and LLaMA have become foundational tools in artificial intelligence (AI), achieving state-of-the-art performance in summarization, translation, reasoning, and dialogue. However, since LLMs are increasingly integrated in high-risk decision making in domains such as healthcare, law, and education, their lack of transparency raises urgent concerns for safety, accountability, and public trust [12]. The scale and complexity of these models, covering billions of parameters trained in opaque corpora, make their internal reasoning fundamentally inscrutable. This opacity creates barriers to responsible adoption, as users often lack meaningful ways to understand or challenge outputs. Without stakeholder-sensitive explanations, systems risk overtrust, misinterpretation, or outright rejection [11]. Explainable AI (XAI) for LLMs has therefore evolved beyond technical introspection [6]. The goal is not only to expose internal mechanisms but also to support human interaction, trust calibration, and decision assurance. As model behavior becomes more emergent and unpredictable [10], explanation systems must serve cognitive, functional, and ethical purposes simultaneously [7].

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly expanding and integrating more into daily life to automate tasks, guide decision making, and enhance efficiency. However, complex AI models, which make decisions without providing clear explanations (known as the "black-box problem"), currently restrict trust and widespread adoption of AI. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has emerged to address the black-box problem of making AI systems more interpretable and transparent so stakeholders can trust, verify, and act upon AI-based outcomes. Researchers have developed various techniques to foster XAI in the Software Development Lifecycle. However, there are gaps in applying XAI techniques in the Software Engineering phases. Literature review shows that 68% of XAI in Software Engineering research is focused on maintenance as opposed to 8% on software management and requirements. In this paper, we present a comprehensive survey of the applications of XAI methods such as concept-based explanations, Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME), SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), rule extraction, attention mechanisms, counterfactual explanations, and example-based explanations to the different phases of the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC), including requirements elicitation, design and development, testing and deployment, and evolution. To the best of our knowledge, this paper presents the first comprehensive survey of XAI techniques for every phase of the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). This survey aims to promote explainable AI in Software Engineering and facilitate the practical application of complex AI models in AI-driven software development.

Counterfactual explanations methods provide an important tool in the field of {interpretable machine learning}. Recent advances in this direction have focused on diffusion models to explain a deep classifier. However, these techniques have predominantly focused on problems in computer vision. In this paper, we focus on tabular data typical in finance and the social sciences and propose a novel guided reverse process for categorical features based on an approximation to the Gumbel-softmax distribution. Furthermore, we study the effect of the temperature $τ$ and derive a theoretical bound between the Gumbel-softmax distribution and our proposed approximated distribution. We perform experiments on several large-scale credit lending and other tabular datasets, assessing their performance in terms of the quantitative measures of interpretability, diversity, instability, and validity. These results indicate that our approach outperforms popular baseline methods, producing robust and realistic counterfactual explanations.