Explainable AI provides a whole new layer of insight by allowing analysts to clearly see why a prediction was made. When it comes to Enterprise AI (Artificial Intelligence), we often focus on automating repetitive business processes for a very simple reason and it doesn't take much imagination to see the value. But what if you wanted to gauge the impact of an unexpected event, such as a hurricane, on your business's bottom line? Maybe you'd like to compare the probable financial outcomes of a strategic decision before you make it? Explainable AI, which combines Human Intelligence with Artificial Intelligence, means employees now have the visibility to make these decisions.

We argue that an explainable artificial intelligence must possess a rationale for its decisions, be able to infer the purpose of observed behaviour, and be able to explain its decisions in the context of what its audience understands and intends. To address these issues we present four novel contributions. Firstly, we define an arbitrary task in terms of perceptual states, and discuss two extremes of a domain of possible solutions. Secondly, we define the intensional solution. Optimal by some definitions of intelligence, it describes the purpose of a task. An agent possessed of it has a rationale for its decisions in terms of that purpose, expressed in a perceptual symbol system grounded in hardware. Thirdly, to communicate that rationale requires natural language, a means of encoding and decoding perceptual states. We propose a theory of meaning in which, to acquire language, an agent should model the world a language describes rather than the language itself. If the utterances of humans are of predictive value to the agent's goals, then the agent will imbue those utterances with meaning in terms of its own goals and perceptual states. In the context of Peircean semiotics, a community of agents must share rough approximations of signs, referents and interpretants in order to communicate. Meaning exists only in the context of intent, so to communicate with humans an agent must have comparable experiences and goals. An agent that learns intensional solutions, compelled by objective functions somewhat analogous to human motivators such as hunger and pain, may be capable of explaining its rationale not just in terms of its own intent, but in terms of what its audience understands and intends. It forms some approximation of the perceptual states of humans.

Deep Learning has become a very valuable tool in different fields, and no one doubts the learning capacity of these models. Nevertheless, since Deep Learning models are often seen as black boxes due to their lack of interpretability, there is a general mistrust in their decision-making process. To find a balance between effectiveness and interpretability, Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is gaining popularity in recent years, and some of the methods within this area are used to generate counterfactual explanations. The process of generating these explanations generally consists of solving an optimization problem for each input to be explained, which is unfeasible when real-time feedback is needed. To speed up this process, some methods have made use of autoencoders to generate instant counterfactual explanations. Recently, a method called Deep Guided Counterfactual Explanations (DGCEx) has been proposed, which trains an autoencoder attached to a classification model, in order to generate straightforward counterfactual explanations. However, this method does not ensure that the generated counterfactual instances are close to the data manifold, so unrealistic counterfactual instances may be generated. To overcome this issue, this paper presents Distribution Aware Deep Guided Counterfactual Explanations (DA-DGCEx), which adds a term to the DGCEx cost function that penalizes out of distribution counterfactual instances.

Several social factors impact how people respond to AI explanations used to justify AI decisions affecting them personally. In this position paper, we define a framework called the \textit{layers of explanation} (LEx), a lens through which we can assess the appropriateness of different types of explanations. The framework uses the notions of \textit{sensitivity} (emotional responsiveness) of features and the level of \textit{stakes} (decision's consequence) in a domain to determine whether different types of explanations are \textit{appropriate} in a given context. We demonstrate how to use the framework to assess the appropriateness of different types of explanations in different domains.

In this paper we suggest NICE: a new algorithm to generate counterfactual explanations for heterogeneous tabular data. The design of our algorithm specifically takes into account algorithmic requirements that often emerge in real-life deployments: the ability to provide an explanation for all predictions, being efficient in run-time, and being able to handle any classification model (also non-differentiable ones). More specifically, our approach exploits information from a nearest instance tospeed up the search process. We propose four versions of NICE, where three of them optimize the explanations for one of the following properties: sparsity, proximity or plausibility. An extensive empirical comparison on 10 datasets shows that our algorithm performs better on all properties than the current state-of-the-art. These analyses show a trade-off between on the one hand plausiblity and on the other hand proximity or sparsity, with our different optimization methods offering the choice to select the preferred trade-off. An open-source implementation of NICE can be found at https://github.com/ADMAntwerp/NICE.

Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com. There's been a lot of buzz on Capitol Hill lately around the term "budget reconciliation." It's how the Senate passed another COVID-19 stimulus relief in March, this one worth $1.9 trillion. Now, it's at the forefront again as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and his caucus mull new ways to pass a developing infrastructure package amid a gridlocked upper chamber.

Abstract: Intelligent information systems that contain emergent elements often encounter trust problems because results do not get sufficiently explained and the procedure itself can not be fully retraced. This is caused by a control flow depending either on stochastic elements or on the structure and relevance of the input data. Trust in such algorithms can be established by letting users interact with the system so that they can explore results and find patterns that can be compared with their expected solution. Reflecting features and patterns of human understanding of a domain against algorithmic results can create awareness of such patterns and may increase the trust that a user has in the solution. If expectations are not met, close inspection can be used to decide whether a solution conforms to the expectations or whether it goes beyond the expected. By either accepting or rejecting a solution, the user's set of expectations evolves and a learning process for the users is established. In this paper we present a conceptual framework that reflects and supports this process. The framework is the result of an analysis of two exemplary case studies from two different disciplines with information systems that assist experts in their complex tasks. Keywords: Intelligent Systems, AI, Trust, Explainable AI, Knowledge Management, Knowledge Patterns 1. INTRODUCTION uncommon and have been constructed in uncommon ways. Such techniques, a class to which systems that we now Human expertise in many aspects is largely based on call intelligent systems belong to, produce results of high prior knowledge and familiar patterns, which have either complexity (e.g.

Machine learning-based systems are rapidly gaining popularity and in-line with that there has been a huge research surge in the field of explainability to ensure that machine learning models are reliable, fair, and can be held liable for their decision-making process. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods are typically deployed to debug black-box machine learning models but in comparison to tabular, text, and image data, explainability in time series is still relatively unexplored. The aim of this study was to achieve and evaluate model agnostic explainability in a time series forecasting problem. This work focused on proving a solution for a digital consultancy company aiming to find a data-driven approach in order to understand the effect of their sales related activities on the sales deals closed. The solution involved framing the problem as a time series forecasting problem to predict the sales deals and the explainability was achieved using two novel model agnostic explainability techniques, Local explainable model-agnostic explanations (LIME) and Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) which were evaluated using human evaluation of explainability. The results clearly indicate that the explanations produced by LIME and SHAP greatly helped lay humans in understanding the predictions made by the machine learning model. The presented work can easily be extended to any time

Most of state of the art methods applied on time series consist of deep learning methods that are too complex to be interpreted. This lack of interpretability is a major drawback, as several applications in the real world are critical tasks, such as the medical field or the autonomous driving field. The explainability of models applied on time series has not gather much attention compared to the computer vision or the natural language processing fields. In this paper, we present an overview of existing explainable AI (XAI) methods applied on time series and illustrate the type of explanations they produce. We also provide a reflection on the impact of these explanation methods to provide confidence and trust in the AI systems.

The paper proposes a novel architecture for explainable AI based on semantic technologies and AI. We tailor the architecture for the domain of demand forecasting and validate it on a real-world case study. The provided explanations combine concepts describing features relevant to a particular forecast, related media events, and metadata regarding external datasets of interest. The knowledge graph provides concepts that convey feature information at a higher abstraction level. By using them, explanations do not expose sensitive details regarding the demand forecasting models. The explanations also emphasize actionable dimensions where suitable. We link domain knowledge, forecasted values, and forecast explanations in a Knowledge Graph. The ontology and dataset we developed for this use case are publicly available for further research.