In this paper, we develop a way to encode several NP-Complete problems in Abstract Argumentation to Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) problems. In this form, a solution for a QUBO problem involves minimizing a quadratic function over binary variables (0/1), where the coefficients can be represented by a symmetric square matrix (or an equivalent upper triangular version). With the QUBO formulation, exploiting new computing architectures, such as Quantum and Digital Annealers, is possible. A more conventional approach consists of developing approximate solvers, which, in this case, are used to tackle the intrinsic complexity. We performed tests to prove the correctness and applicability of classical problems in Argumentation and enforcement of argument sets. We compared our approach to two other approximate solvers in the literature during tests. In the final experimentation, we used a Simulated Annealing algorithm on a local machine. Also, we tested a Quantum Annealer from the D-Wave Ocean SDK and the Leap Quantum Cloud Service.

Explaining the strength of arguments under gradual semantics is receiving increasing attention. For example, various studies in the literature offer explanations by computing the attribution scores of arguments or edges in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). These explanations, known as Argument Attribution Explanations (AAEs) and Relation Attribution Explanations (RAEs), commonly employ removal-based and Shapley-based techniques for computing the attribution scores. While AAEs and RAEs have proven useful in several applications with acyclic QBAFs, they remain largely unexplored for cyclic QBAFs. Furthermore, existing applications tend to focus solely on either AAEs or RAEs, but do not compare them directly. In this paper, we apply both AAEs and RAEs, to Truth Discovery QBAFs (TD-QBAFs), which assess the trustworthiness of sources (e.g., websites) and their claims (e.g., the severity of a virus), and feature complex cycles. We find that both AAEs and RAEs can provide interesting explanations and can give non-trivial and surprising insights.

The visualization of argumentation frameworks (AFs) is crucial for enabling a wide applicability of argumentative tools. However, their visualization is often considered only as an accompanying part of tools for computing semantics and standard graphical representations are used. We introduce a new visualization technique that draws an AF, together with an extension (as part of the input), as a 3-layer graph layout. Our technique supports the user to more easily explore the visualized AF, better understand extensions, and verify algorithms for computing semantics. To optimize the visual clarity and aesthetics of this layout, we propose to minimize edge crossings in our 3-layer drawing. We do so by an exact ILP-based approach, but also propose a fast heuristic pipeline. Via a quantitative evaluation, we show that the heuristic is feasible even for large instances, while producing at most twice as many crossings as an optimal drawing in most cases.

Though recent advances in machine learning have led to significant improvements in natural language interfaces for databases, the accuracy and reliability of these systems remain limited, especially in high-stakes domains. This paper introduces SQLucid, a novel user interface that bridges the gap between non-expert users and complex database querying processes. SQLucid addresses existing limitations by integrating visual correspondence, intermediate query results, and editable step-by-step SQL explanations in natural language to facilitate user understanding and engagement. This unique blend of features empowers users to understand and refine SQL queries easily and precisely. Two user studies and one quantitative experiment were conducted to validate SQLucid's effectiveness, showing significant improvement in task completion accuracy and user confidence compared to existing interfaces. Our code is available at https://github.com/magic-YuanTian/SQLucid.

Proposals of artificial intelligence (AI) solutions based on increasingly complex and accurate predictive models are becoming ubiquitous across many disciplines. As the complexity of these models grows, transparency and users' understanding often diminish. This suggests that accurate prediction alone is insufficient for making an AI-based solution truly useful. In the development of healthcare systems, this introduces new issues related to accountability and safety. Understanding how and why an AI system makes a recommendation may require complex explanations of its inner workings and reasoning processes. Although research on explainable AI (XAI) has significantly increased in recent years and there is high demand for XAI in medicine, defining what constitutes a good explanation remains ad hoc, and providing adequate explanations continues to be challenging. To fully realize the potential of AI, it is critical to address two fundamental questions about explanations for safety-critical AI applications, such as health-AI: (1) What is an explanation in health-AI? and (2) What are the attributes of a good explanation in health-AI? In this study, we examined published literature and gathered expert opinions through a two-round Delphi study. The research outputs include (1) a definition of what constitutes an explanation in health-AI and (2) a comprehensive list of attributes that characterize a good explanation in health-AI.

Machine learning (ML) has seen exponential growth in recent years, finding applications in various domains such as finance, medicine, and cybersecurity. Malware remains a significant threat to modern computing, frequently used by attackers to compromise systems. While numerous machine learning-based approaches for malware detection achieve high performance, they often lack transparency and fail to explain their predictions. This is a critical drawback in malware analysis, where understanding the rationale behind detections is essential for security analysts to verify and disseminate information. Explainable AI (XAI) addresses this issue by maintaining high accuracy while producing models that provide clear, understandable explanations for their decisions. In this survey, we comprehensively review the current state-of-the-art ML-based malware detection techniques and popular XAI approaches. Additionally, we discuss research implementations and the challenges of explainable malware analysis. This theoretical survey serves as an entry point for researchers interested in XAI applications in malware detection. By analyzing recent advancements in explainable malware analysis, we offer a broad overview of the progress in this field, positioning our work as the first to extensively cover XAI methods for malware classification and detection.

What is it to interpret the outputs of an opaque machine learning model. One approach is to develop interpretable machine learning techniques. These techniques aim to show how machine learning models function by providing either model centric local or global explanations, which can be based on mechanistic interpretations revealing the inner working mechanisms of models or nonmechanistic approximations showing input feature output data relationships. In this paper, we draw on social philosophy to argue that interpreting machine learning outputs in certain normatively salient domains could require appealing to a third type of explanation that we call sociostructural explanation. The relevance of this explanation type is motivated by the fact that machine learning models are not isolated entities but are embedded within and shaped by social structures. Sociostructural explanations aim to illustrate how social structures contribute to and partially explain the outputs of machine learning models. We demonstrate the importance of sociostructural explanations by examining a racially biased healthcare allocation algorithm. Our proposal highlights the need for transparency beyond model interpretability, understanding the outputs of machine learning systems could require a broader analysis that extends beyond the understanding of the machine learning model itself.

We propose misogyny detection as an Argumentative Reasoning task and we investigate the capacity of large language models (LLMs) to understand the implicit reasoning used to convey misogyny in both Italian and English. The central aim is to generate the missing reasoning link between a message and the implied meanings encoding the misogyny. Our study uses argumentation theory as a foundation to form a collection of prompts in both zero-shot and few-shot settings. These prompts integrate different techniques, including chain-of-thought reasoning and augmented knowledge. Our findings show that LLMs fall short on reasoning capabilities about misogynistic comments and that they mostly rely on their implicit knowledge derived from internalized common stereotypes about women to generate implied assumptions, rather than on inductive reasoning.

Human understandable explanation of deep learning models is necessary for many critical and sensitive applications. Unlike image or tabular data where the importance of each input feature (for the classifier's decision) can be directly projected into the input, time series distinguishable features (e.g. dominant frequency) are often hard to manifest in time domain for a user to easily understand. Moreover, most explanation methods require a baseline value as an indication of the absence of any feature. However, the notion of lack of feature, which is often defined as black pixels for vision tasks or zero/mean values for tabular data, is not well-defined in time series. Despite the adoption of explainable AI methods (XAI) from tabular and vision domain into time series domain, these differences limit the application of these XAI methods in practice. In this paper, we propose a simple yet effective method that allows a model originally trained on time domain to be interpreted in other explanation spaces using existing methods. We suggest four explanation spaces that each can potentially alleviate these issues in certain types of time series. Our method can be readily adopted in existing platforms without any change to trained models or XAI methods. The code is available at https://github.com/shrezaei/TS-X-spaces.

For optimization models to be used in practice, it is crucial that users trust the results. A key factor in this aspect is the interpretability of the solution process. A previous framework for inherently interpretable optimization models used decision trees to map instances to solutions of the underlying optimization model. Based on this work, we investigate how we can use more general optimization rules to further increase interpretability and at the same time give more freedom to the decision maker. The proposed rules do not map to a concrete solution but to a set of solutions characterized by common features. To find such optimization rules, we present an exact methodology using mixed-integer programming formulations as well as heuristics. We also outline the challenges and opportunities that these methods present. In particular, we demonstrate the improvement in solution quality that our approach offers compared to existing frameworks for interpretable optimization and we discuss the relationship between interpretability and performance. These findings are supported by experiments using both synthetic and real-world data.