Prior work on generating explanations has been focused on providing the rationale behind the robot's decision making. While these approaches provide the right explanations from the explainer's perspective, they fail to heed the cognitive requirement of understanding an explanation from the explainee's perspective. In this work, we set out to address this issue from a planning context by considering the order of information provided in an explanation, which is referred to as the progressiveness of explanations. Progressive explanations contribute to a better understanding by minimizing the cumulative cognitive effort required for understanding all the information in an explanation. As a result, such explanations are easier to understand. Given the sequential nature of communicating information, a general formulation based on goal-based Markov Decision Processes for generating progressive explanation is presented. The reward function of this MDP is learned via inverse reinforcement learning based on explanations that are provided by human subjects. Our method is evaluated in an escape-room domain. The results show that our progressive explanation generation method reduces the cognitive load over two baselines.

Many online businesses rely on image galleries to deliver a good customer experience and consequently, generate more revenue. Hence, the image galleries need to be of the highest quality.

Automated negotiation can be an efficient method for resolving conflict and redistributing resources in a coalition setting. Automated negotiation has already seen increased usage in fields such as e-commerce and power distribution in smart girds, and recent advancements in opponent modelling have proven to deliver better outcomes. However, significant barriers to more widespread adoption remain, such as lack of predictable outcome over time and user trust. Additionally, there have been many recent advancements in the field of reasoning about uncertainty, which could help alleviate both those problems. As there is no recent survey on these two fields, and specifically not on their possible intersection we aim to provide such a survey here.

We attempt to give a unifying view of the various recent attempts to (i) improve the interpretability of tree-based models and (ii) debias the the default variable-importance measure in random Forests, Gini importance. In particular, we demonstrate a common thread among the out-of-bag based bias correction methods and their connection to local explanation for trees. In addition, we point out a bias caused by the inclusion of inbag data in the newly developed explainable AI for trees algorithms.

Z Advanced Computing, Inc. (ZAC), the pioneer startup on Explainable-AI (Artificial Intelligence) (XAI), is developing its Smart Home product line through a paid-pilot for Smart Appliances for BSH Home Appliances (a subsidiary of the Bosch Group, originally a joint venture between Bosch and Siemens), the largest manufacturer of home appliances in Europe and one of the largest in the world. ZAC just successfully finished its Phase 1 of the pilot program. "Our cognitive-based algorithm is more robust, resilient, consistent, and reproducible, with a higher accuracy, than Convolutional Neural Nets or GANs, which others are using now. It also requires much smaller number of training samples, compared to CNNs, which is a huge advantage," said Dr. Saied Tadayon, CTO of ZAC. "We did the entire work on a regular laptop, for both training and recognition, without any dedicated GPU. So, our computing requirement is much smaller than a typical Neural Net, which requires a dedicated GPU," continued Dr. Bijan Tadayon, CEO of ZAC.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) seems to be a hot topic nowadays. It is a topic I came across recently in a number of instances: workshops organized by the European Defense Agency (EDA), posts from technology partners such as Expert System (here) or internal discussion with SDL's Research team. The straightforward definition of XAI comes from Wikipedia: "Explainable AI (XAI) refers to methods and techniques in the application of artificial intelligence technology (AI) such that the results of the solution can be understood by human experts. It contrasts with the concept of the "black box" in machine learning where even their designers cannot explain why the AI arrived at a specific decision. XAI is an implementation of the social right to explanation."

The statistical branch of Artificial Intelligence has enamored organizations across industries, spurred an immense amount of capital dedicated to its technologies, and entranced numerous media outlets for the past couple of years. All of this attention, however, will ultimately prove unwarranted unless organizations, data scientists, and various vendors can answer one simple question: can they provide Explainable AI? Although the ability to explain the results of Machine Learning models--and produce consistent results from them--has never been easy, a number of emergent techniques have recently appeared to open the proverbial'black box' rendering these models so difficult to explain. One of the most useful involves modeling real-world events with the adaptive schema of knowledge graphs and, via Machine Learning, gleaning whether they're related and how frequently they take place together. When the knowledge graph environment becomes endowed with an additional temporal dimension that organizations can traverse forwards and backwards with dynamic visualizations, they can understand what actually triggered these events, how one affected others, and the critical aspect of causation necessary for Explainable AI.

Interest in the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence has been growing for decades, and has accelerated recently. As Artificial Intelligence models have become more complex, and often more opaque, with the incorporation of complex machine learning techniques, explainability has become more critical. Recently, researchers have been investigating and tackling explainability with a user-centric focus, looking for explanations to consider trustworthiness, comprehensibility, explicit provenance, and context-awareness. In this chapter, we leverage our survey of explanation literature in Artificial Intelligence and closely related fields and use these past efforts to generate a set of explanation types that we feel reflect the expanded needs of explanation for today's artificial intelligence applications. We define each type and provide an example question that would motivate the need for this style of explanation. We believe this set of explanation types will help future system designers in their generation and prioritization of requirements and further help generate explanations that are better aligned to users' and situational needs.

Explainability has been an important goal since the early days of Artificial Intelligence. Several approaches for producing explanations have been developed. However, many of these approaches were tightly coupled with the capabilities of the artificial intelligence systems at the time. With the proliferation of AI-enabled systems in sometimes critical settings, there is a need for them to be explainable to end-users and decision-makers. We present a historical overview of explainable artificial intelligence systems, with a focus on knowledge-enabled systems, spanning the expert systems, cognitive assistants, semantic applications, and machine learning domains. Additionally, borrowing from the strengths of past approaches and identifying gaps needed to make explanations user- and context-focused, we propose new definitions for explanations and explainable knowledge-enabled systems.

Providing explanations of chosen robotic actions can help to increase the transparency of robotic planning and improve users' trust. Social sciences suggest that the best explanations are contrastive, explaining not just why one action is taken, but why one action is taken instead of another. We formalize the notion of contrastive explanations for robotic planning policies based on Markov decision processes, drawing on insights from the social sciences. We present methods for the automated generation of contrastive explanations with three key factors: selectiveness, constrictiveness, and responsibility. The results of a user study with 100 participants on the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform show that our generated contrastive explanations can help to increase users' understanding and trust of robotic planning policies while reducing users' cognitive burden.