Phishing and related cyber threats are becoming more varied and technologically advanced. Among these, email-based phishing remains the most dominant and persistent threat. These attacks exploit human vulnerabilities to disseminate malware or gain unauthorized access to sensitive information. Deep learning (DL) models, particularly transformer-based models, have significantly enhanced phishing mitigation through their contextual understanding of language. However, some recent threats, specifically Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated phishing attacks, are reducing the overall system resilience of phishing detectors. In response, adversarial training has shown promise against AI-generated phishing threats. This study presents a hybrid approach that uses DistilBERT, a smaller, faster, and lighter version of the BERT transformer model for email classification. Robustness against text-based adversarial perturbations is reinforced using Fast Gradient Method (FGM) adversarial training. Furthermore, the framework integrates the LIME Explainable AI (XAI) technique to enhance the transparency of the DistilBERT architecture. The framework also uses the Flan-T5-small language model from Hugging Face to generate plain-language security narrative explanations for end-users. This combined approach ensures precise phishing classification while providing easily understandable justifications for the model's decisions.

Machine learning models achieve state-of-the-art performance across domains, yet their lack of interpretability limits safe deployment in high-stakes settings. Counterfactual explanations are widely used to provide actionable "what-if" recourse, but they typically remain instance-specific and do not quantify which features systematically drive outcome changes within coherent regions of the feature space or across an entire dataset. We introduce FLEX (Feature importance from Layered counterfactual EXplanations), a model- and domain-agnostic framework that converts sets of counterfactuals into feature change frequency scores at local, regional, and global levels. FLEX generalises local change-frequency measures by aggregating across instances and neighbourhoods, offering interpretable rankings that reflect how often each feature must change to flip predictions. The framework is compatible with different counterfactual generation methods, allowing users to emphasise characteristics such as sparsity, feasibility, or actionability, thereby tailoring the derived feature importances to practical constraints. We evaluate FLEX on two contrasting tabular tasks: traffic accident severity prediction and loan approval, and compare FLEX to SHAP- and LIME-derived feature importance values. Results show that (i) FLEX's global rankings correlate with SHAP while surfacing additional drivers, and (ii) regional analyses reveal context-specific factors that global summaries miss. FLEX thus bridges the gap between local recourse and global attribution, supporting transparent and intervention-oriented decision-making in risk-sensitive applications.

Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) is a powerful structured argumentation formalism, but exact computation of extensions under stable semantics is intractable for large frameworks. We present the first Graph Neural Network (GNN) approach to approximate credulous acceptance in ABA. To leverage GNNs, we model ABA frameworks via a dependency graph representation encoding assumptions, claims and rules as nodes, with heterogeneous edge labels distinguishing support, derive and attack relations. We propose two GNN architectures - ABAGCN and ABAGAT - that stack residual heterogeneous convolution or attention layers, respectively, to learn node embeddings. Our models are trained on the ICCMA 2023 benchmark, augmented with synthetic ABAFs, with hyperparameters optimised via Bayesian search. Empirically, both ABAGCN and ABAGAT outperform a state-of-the-art GNN baseline that we adapt from the abstract argumentation literature, achieving a node-level F1 score of up to 0.71 on the ICCMA instances. Finally, we develop a sound polynomial time extension-reconstruction algorithm driven by our predictor: it reconstructs stable extensions with F1 above 0.85 on small ABAFs and maintains an F1 of about 0.58 on large frameworks. Our work opens new avenues for scalable approximate reasoning in structured argumentation.

Complex systems are increasingly explored through simulation-driven engineering workflows that combine physics-based and empirical models with optimization and analytics. Despite their power, these workflows face two central obstacles: (1) high computational cost, since accurate exploration requires many expensive simulator runs; and (2) limited transparency and reliability when decisions rely on opaque blackbox components. We propose a workflow that addresses both challenges by training lightweight emulators on compact designs of experiments that (i) provide fast, low-latency approximations of expensive simulators, (ii) enable rigorous uncertainty quantification, and (iii) are adapted for global and local Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) analyses. This workflow unifies every simulation-based complex-system analysis tool, ranging from engineering design to agent-based models for socio-environmental understanding. In this paper, we proposea comparative methodology and practical recommendations for using surrogate-based explainability tools within the proposed workflow. The methodology supports continuous and categorical inputs, combines global-effect and uncertainty analyses with local attribution, and evaluates the consistency of explanations across surrogate models, thereby diagnosing surrogate adequacy and guiding further data collection or model refinement. We demonstrate the approach on two contrasting case studies: a multidisciplinary design analysis of a hybrid-electric aircraft and an agent-based model of urban segregation. Results show that the surrogate model and XAI coupling enables large-scale exploration in seconds, uncovers nonlinear interactions and emergent behaviors, identifies key design and policy levers, and signals regions where surrogates require more data or alternative architectures.

As the use of AI in society grows, addressing emerging biases is essential to prevent systematic discrimination. Several bias detection methods have been proposed, but, with few exceptions, these tend to ignore transparency. Instead, interpretability and explainability are core requirements for algorithmic fairness, even more so than for other algorithmic solutions, given the human-oriented nature of fairness. We present ABIDE (Argumentative BIas detection by DEbate), a novel framework that structures bias detection transparently as debate, guided by an underlying argument graph as understood in (formal and computational) argumentation. The arguments are about the success chances of groups in local neighbourhoods and the significance of these neighbourhoods. We evaluate ABIDE experimentally and demonstrate its strengths in performance against an argumentative baseline.

In the landscape of Fact-based Judgment Prediction and Explanation (FJPE), reliance on factual data is essential for developing robust and realistic AI-driven decision-making tools. This paper introduces TathyaNyaya, the largest annotated dataset for FJPE tailored to the Indian legal context, encompassing judgments from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Derived from the Hindi terms "Tathya" (fact) and "Nyaya" (justice), the TathyaNyaya dataset is uniquely designed to focus on factual statements rather than complete legal texts, reflecting real-world judicial processes where factual data drives outcomes. Complementing this dataset, we present FactLegalLlama, an instruction-tuned variant of the LLaMa-3-8B Large Language Model (LLM), optimized for generating high-quality explanations in FJPE tasks. Finetuned on the factual data in TathyaNyaya, FactLegalLlama integrates predictive accuracy with coherent, contextually relevant explanations, addressing the critical need for transparency and interpretability in AI-assisted legal systems. Our methodology combines transformers for binary judgment prediction with FactLegalLlama for explanation generation, creating a robust framework for advancing FJPE in the Indian legal domain. TathyaNyaya not only surpasses existing datasets in scale and diversity but also establishes a benchmark for building explainable AI systems in legal analysis. The findings underscore the importance of factual precision and domain-specific tuning in enhancing predictive performance and interpretability, positioning TathyaNyaya and FactLegalLlama as foundational resources for AI-assisted legal decision-making.

Recent advances in deep learning have improved multivariate time series (MTS) classification and regression by capturing complex patterns, but their lack of transparency hinders decision-making. Explainable AI (XAI) methods offer partial insights, yet often fall short of conveying the full decision space. Counterfactual Explanations (CE) provide a promising alternative, but current approaches typically prioritize either accuracy, proximity or sparsity -- rarely all -- limiting their practical value. To address this, we propose CONFETTI, a novel multi-objective CE method for MTS. CONFETTI identifies key MTS subsequences, locates a counterfactual target, and optimally modifies the time series to balance prediction confidence, proximity and sparsity. This method provides actionable insights with minimal changes, improving interpretability, and decision support. CONFETTI is evaluated on seven MTS datasets from the UEA archive, demonstrating its effectiveness in various domains. CONFETTI consistently outperforms state-of-the-art CE methods in its optimization objectives, and in six other metrics from the literature, achieving $\geq10\%$ higher confidence while improving sparsity in $\geq40\%$.

In our article, we describe a method for generating counterfactual explanations in high-dimensional spaces using four steps that involve fitting our dataset to a model, finding the decision boundary, determining constraints on the problem, and computing the closest point (counterfactual explanation) from that boundary. We propose a discretized approach where we find many discrete points on the boundary and then identify the closest feasible counterfactual explanation. This method, which we later call $\textit{Segmented Sampling for Boundary Approximation}$ (SSBA), applies binary search to find decision boundary points and then searches for the closest boundary point. Across four datasets of varying dimensionality, we show that our method can outperform current methods for counterfactual generation with reductions in distance between $5\%$ to $50\%$ in terms of the $L_2$ norm. Our method can also handle real-world constraints by restricting changes to immutable and categorical features, such as age, gender, sex, height, and other related characteristics such as the case for a health-based dataset. In terms of runtime, the SSBA algorithm generates decision boundary points on multiple orders of magnitude in the same given time when we compare to a grid-based approach. In general, our method provides a simple and effective model-agnostic method that can compute nearest feasible (i.e. realistic with constraints) counterfactual explanations. All of our results and code are available at: https://github.com/dsin85691/SSBA_For_Counterfactuals

Structural measures of graphs, such as treewidth, are central tools in computational complexity resulting in efficient algorithms when exploiting the parameter. It is even known that modern SAT solvers work efficiently on instances of small treewidth. Since these solvers are widely applied, research interests in compact encodings into (Q)SAT for solving and to understand encoding limitations. Even more general is the graph parameter clique-width, which unlike treewidth can be small for dense graphs. Although algorithms are available for clique-width, little is known about encodings. We initiate the quest to understand encoding capabilities with clique-width by considering abstract argumentation, which is a robust framework for reasoning with conflicting arguments. It is based on directed graphs and asks for computationally challenging properties, making it a natural candidate to study computational properties. We design novel reductions from argumentation problems to (Q)SAT. Our reductions linearly preserve the clique-width, resulting in directed decomposition-guided (DDG) reductions. We establish novel results for all argumentation semantics, including counting. Notably, the overhead caused by our DDG reductions cannot be significantly improved under reasonable assumptions.

Privacy leakage in AI-based decision processes poses significant risks, particularly when sensitive information can be inferred. We propose a formal framework to audit privacy leakage using abductive explanations, which identifies minimal sufficient evidence justifying model decisions and determines whether sensitive information disclosed. Our framework formalizes both individual and system-level leakage, introducing the notion of Potentially Applicable Explanations (P AE) to identify individuals whose outcomes can shield those with sensitive features. This approach provides rigorous privacy guarantees while producing human-understandable explanations, a key requirement for auditing tools. Experimental evaluation on the German Credit Dataset illustrates how the importance of sensitive literal in the model decision process affects privacy leakage. Despite computational challenges and simplifying assumptions, our results demonstrate that abductive reasoning enables interpretable privacy auditing, offering a practical pathway to reconcile transparency, model interpretability, and privacy preserving in AI decision-making.