Artificial intelligence (AI)-native radio access networks (RANs) will serve vertical industries with stringent requirements: smart grids, autonomous vehicles, remote healthcare, industrial automation, etc. To achieve these requirements, modern 5G/6G design increasingly leverage AI for network optimization, but the opacity of AI decisions poses risks in mission-critical domains. These use cases are often delivered via non-public networks (NPNs) or dedicated network slices, where reliability and safety are vital. In this paper, we motivate the need for transparent and trustworthy AI in high-stakes communications (e.g., healthcare, industrial automation, and robotics) by drawing on 3rd generation partnership project (3GPP)'s vision for non-public networks. We design a mathematical framework to model the trade-offs between transparency (explanation fidelity and fairness), latency, and graphics processing unit (GPU) utilization in deploying explainable AI (XAI) models. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that our proposed hybrid XAI model xAI-Native, consistently surpasses conventional baseline models in performance.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems in high-stakes domains raise concerns about proxy discrimination, unfairness, and explainability. Existing audits often fail to reveal why unfairness arises, particularly when rooted in structural bias. We propose a novel framework using formal abductive explanations to explain proxy discrimination in individual AI decisions. Leveraging background knowledge, our method identifies which features act as unjustified proxies for protected attributes, revealing hidden structural biases. Central to our approach is the concept of aptitude, a task-relevant property independent of group membership, with a mapping function aligning individuals of equivalent aptitude across groups to assess fairness substantively. As a proof of concept, we showcase the framework with examples taken from the German credit dataset, demonstrating its applicability in real-world cases.

Foundation models hold promise for specialized medical imaging tasks, though their effectiveness in breast imaging remains underexplored. This study leverages BiomedCLIP as a foundation model to address challenges in model generalizations. BiomedCLIP was adapted for automated BI-RADS breast density classification using multi-modality mammographic data (synthesized 2D images, digital mammography, and digital breast tomosyn-thesis). Using 96,995 images, we compared single-modality (s2D only) and multi-modality training approaches, addressing class imbalance through weighted contrastive learning. Both approaches achieved similar accuracy (multi-modality: 0.74, single-modality: 0.73), with the multi-modality model offering broader applicability across different imaging modalities and higher AUC values consistently above 0.84 across BI-RADS categories. External validation on the RSNA and EMBED datasets showed strong generalization capabilities (AUC range: 0.80-0.93). GradCAM visualizations confirmed consistent and clinically relevant attention patterns, highlighting the models' interpretability and robustness. This research underscores the potential of foundation models for breast imaging applications, paving the way for future extensions for diagnostic tasks.

Online conversations have become more prevalent on public discussion platforms (e.g. Reddit). With growing controversial topics, it is desirable to summarize not only diverse arguments, but also their rationale and justification. Early studies on text summarization focus on capturing general salient information in source documents, overlooking the argumentative nature of online conversations. Recent research on conversation summarization although considers the argumentative relationship among sentences, fail to explicate deeper argument structure within sentences for summarization. In this paper, we propose a novel task of argument-aware quantitative summarization to reveal the claim-reason structure of arguments in conversations, with quantities measuring argument strength. We further propose ARQUSUMM, a novel framework to address the task. To reveal the underlying argument structure within sentences, ARQUSUMM leverages LLM few-shot learning grounded in the argumentation theory to identify propositions within sentences and their claim-reason relationships. For quantitative summarization, ARQUSUMM employs argument structure-aware clustering algorithms to aggregate arguments and quantify their support. Experiments show that ARQUSUMM outperforms existing conversation and quantitative summarization models and generate summaries representing argument structures that are more helpful to users, of high textual quality and quantification accuracy.

Machine learning models that operate on graph-structured data, such as molecular graphs or social networks, often make accurate predictions but offer little insight into why certain predictions are made. Counterfactual explanations address this challenge by seeking the closest alternative scenario where the model's prediction would change. Although counterfactual explanations are extensively studied in tabular data and computer vision, the graph domain remains comparatively underexplored. Constructing graph counterfactuals is intrinsically difficult because graphs are discrete and non-euclidean objects. We introduce Graph Diffusion Counterfactual Explanation, a novel framework for generating counterfactual explanations on graph data, combining discrete diffusion models and classifier-free guidance. We empirically demonstrate that our method reliably generates in-distribution as well as minimally structurally different counterfactuals for both discrete classification targets and continuous properties.

Concept-based explainable artificial intelligence (C-XAI) can let people see which representations an AI model has learned. This is particularly important when high-level semantic information (e.g., actions and relations) is used to make decisions about abstract categories (e.g., danger). In such tasks, AI models need to generalise beyond situation-specific details, and this ability can be reflected in C-XAI outputs that randomise over irrelevant features. However, it is unclear whether people appreciate such generalisation and can distinguish it from other, less desirable forms of imprecision in C-XAI outputs. Therefore, the present study investigated how the generality and relevance of C-XAI outputs affect people's evaluation of AI. In an experimental railway safety evaluation scenario, participants rated the performance of a simulated AI that classified traffic scenes involving people as dangerous or not. These classification decisions were explained via concepts in the form of similar image snippets. The latter differed in their match with the classified image, either regarding a highly relevant feature (i.e., people's relation to tracks) or a less relevant feature (i.e., people's action). Contrary to the hypotheses, concepts that generalised over less relevant features were rated lower than concepts that matched the classified image precisely. Moreover, their ratings were no better than those for systematic misrepresentations of the less relevant feature. Conversely, participants were highly sensitive to imprecisions in relevant features. These findings cast doubts on the assumption that people can easily infer from C-XAI outputs whether AI models have gained a deeper understanding of complex situations.

SAM to augment concept-based XAI.

We present an approach for generating natural language explanations of high-level behavior of autonomous agents navigating in partially-revealed environments.

To use artificial intelligence and machine learning models wisely we must understand how they interact with the world, including how they depend causally on data inputs. In this work we develop Causal Dependence Plots (CDPs) to visualize how a model's predicted outcome depends on changes in a given predictor