Explanation & Argumentation
Explainable Multimodal Sentiment Analysis on Bengali Memes
Elahi, Kazi Toufique, Rahman, Tasnuva Binte, Shahriar, Shakil, Sarker, Samir, Joy, Sajib Kumar Saha, Shah, Faisal Muhammad
Memes have become a distinctive and effective form of communication in the digital era, attracting online communities and cutting across cultural barriers. Even though memes are frequently linked with humor, they have an amazing capacity to convey a wide range of emotions, including happiness, sarcasm, frustration, and more. Understanding and interpreting the sentiment underlying memes has become crucial in the age of information. Previous research has explored text-based, image-based, and multimodal approaches, leading to the development of models like CAPSAN and PromptHate for detecting various meme categories. However, the study of low-resource languages like Bengali memes remains scarce, with limited availability of publicly accessible datasets. A recent contribution includes the introduction of the MemoSen dataset. However, the achieved accuracy is notably low, and the dataset suffers from imbalanced distribution. In this study, we employed a multimodal approach using ResNet50 and BanglishBERT and achieved a satisfactory result of 0.71 weighted F1-score, performed comparison with unimodal approaches, and interpreted behaviors of the models using explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques.
Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI: Volume 4
Bengel, Lars, Blümel, Lydia, Bezou-Vrakatseli, Elfia, Castagna, Federico, D'Agostino, Giulia, Kuhlmann, Isabelle, Mumford, Jack, Odekerken, Daphne, Russo, Fabrizio, Sarkadi, Stefan, Waller, Madeleine, Xydis, Andreas
This volume contains revised versions of the papers selected for the fourth volume of the Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI (OHAAI). Previously, formal theories of argument and argument interaction have been proposed and studied, and this has led to the more recent study of computational models of argument. Argumentation, as a field within artificial intelligence (AI), is highly relevant for researchers interested in symbolic representations of knowledge and defeasible reasoning. The purpose of this handbook is to provide an open access and curated anthology for the argumentation research community. OHAAI is designed to serve as a research hub to keep track of the latest and upcoming PhD-driven research on the theory and application of argumentation in all areas related to AI.
Pyreal: A Framework for Interpretable ML Explanations
Zytek, Alexandra, Wang, Wei-En, Liu, Dongyu, Berti-Equille, Laure, Veeramachaneni, Kalyan
Users in many domains use machine learning (ML) predictions to help them make decisions. Effective ML-based decision-making often requires explanations of ML models and their predictions. While there are many algorithms that explain models, generating explanations in a format that is comprehensible and useful to decision-makers is a nontrivial task that can require extensive development overhead. We developed Pyreal, a highly extensible system with a corresponding Python implementation for generating a variety of interpretable ML explanations. Pyreal converts data and explanations between the feature spaces expected by the model, relevant explanation algorithms, and human users, allowing users to generate interpretable explanations in a low-code manner. Our studies demonstrate that Pyreal generates more useful explanations than existing systems while remaining both easy-to-use and efficient.
Explainable artificial intelligence approaches for brain-computer interfaces: a review and design space
Rajpura, Param, Cecotti, Hubert, Meena, Yogesh Kumar
This review paper provides an integrated perspective of Explainable Artificial Intelligence techniques applied to Brain-Computer Interfaces. BCIs use predictive models to interpret brain signals for various high-stake applications. However, achieving explainability in these complex models is challenging as it compromises accuracy. The field of XAI has emerged to address the need for explainability across various stakeholders, but there is a lack of an integrated perspective in XAI for BCI (XAI4BCI) literature. It is necessary to differentiate key concepts like explainability, interpretability, and understanding in this context and formulate a comprehensive framework. To understand the need of XAI for BCI, we pose six key research questions for a systematic review and meta-analysis, encompassing its purposes, applications, usability, and technical feasibility. We employ the PRISMA methodology -- preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses to review (n=1246) and analyze (n=84) studies published in 2015 and onwards for key insights. The results highlight that current research primarily focuses on interpretability for developers and researchers, aiming to justify outcomes and enhance model performance. We discuss the unique approaches, advantages, and limitations of XAI4BCI from the literature. We draw insights from philosophy, psychology, and social sciences. We propose a design space for XAI4BCI, considering the evolving need to visualize and investigate predictive model outcomes customised for various stakeholders in the BCI development and deployment lifecycle. This paper is the first to focus solely on reviewing XAI4BCI research articles. This systematic review and meta-analysis findings with the proposed design space prompt important discussions on establishing standards for BCI explanations, highlighting current limitations, and guiding the future of XAI in BCI.
Concept-based Explainable Artificial Intelligence: A Survey
Poeta, Eleonora, Ciravegna, Gabriele, Pastor, Eliana, Cerquitelli, Tania, Baralis, Elena
The field of explainable artificial intelligence emerged in response to the growing need for more transparent and reliable models. However, using raw features to provide explanations has been disputed in several works lately, advocating for more user-understandable explanations. To address this issue, a wide range of papers proposing Concept-based eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (C-XAI) methods have arisen in recent years. Nevertheless, a unified categorization and precise field definition are still missing. This paper fills the gap by offering a thorough review of C-XAI approaches. We define and identify different concepts and explanation types. We provide a taxonomy identifying nine categories and propose guidelines for selecting a suitable category based on the development context. Additionally, we report common evaluation strategies including metrics, human evaluations and dataset employed, aiming to assist the development of future methods. We believe this survey will serve researchers, practitioners, and domain experts in comprehending and advancing this innovative field.
Attribution-based Explanations that Provide Recourse Cannot be Robust
Fokkema, Hidde, de Heide, Rianne, van Erven, Tim
Different users of machine learning methods require different explanations, depending on their goals. To make machine learning accountable to society, one important goal is to get actionable options for recourse, which allow an affected user to change the decision $f(x)$ of a machine learning system by making limited changes to its input $x$. We formalize this by providing a general definition of recourse sensitivity, which needs to be instantiated with a utility function that describes which changes to the decisions are relevant to the user. This definition applies to local attribution methods, which attribute an importance weight to each input feature. It is often argued that such local attributions should be robust, in the sense that a small change in the input $x$ that is being explained, should not cause a large change in the feature weights. However, we prove formally that it is in general impossible for any single attribution method to be both recourse sensitive and robust at the same time. It follows that there must always exist counterexamples to at least one of these properties. We provide such counterexamples for several popular attribution methods, including LIME, SHAP, Integrated Gradients and SmoothGrad. Our results also cover counterfactual explanations, which may be viewed as attributions that describe a perturbation of $x$. We further discuss possible ways to work around our impossibility result, for instance by allowing the output to consist of sets with multiple attributions, and we provide sufficient conditions for specific classes of continuous functions to be recourse sensitive. Finally, we strengthen our impossibility result for the restricted case where users are only able to change a single attribute of $x$, by providing an exact characterization of the functions $f$ to which impossibility applies.
Towards Human-centered Explainable AI: A Survey of User Studies for Model Explanations
Rong, Yao, Leemann, Tobias, Nguyen, Thai-trang, Fiedler, Lisa, Qian, Peizhu, Unhelkar, Vaibhav, Seidel, Tina, Kasneci, Gjergji, Kasneci, Enkelejda
Explainable AI (XAI) is widely viewed as a sine qua non for ever-expanding AI research. A better understanding of the needs of XAI users, as well as human-centered evaluations of explainable models are both a necessity and a challenge. In this paper, we explore how HCI and AI researchers conduct user studies in XAI applications based on a systematic literature review. After identifying and thoroughly analyzing 97core papers with human-based XAI evaluations over the past five years, we categorize them along the measured characteristics of explanatory methods, namely trust, understanding, usability, and human-AI collaboration performance. Our research shows that XAI is spreading more rapidly in certain application domains, such as recommender systems than in others, but that user evaluations are still rather sparse and incorporate hardly any insights from cognitive or social sciences. Based on a comprehensive discussion of best practices, i.e., common models, design choices, and measures in user studies, we propose practical guidelines on designing and conducting user studies for XAI researchers and practitioners. Lastly, this survey also highlights several open research directions, particularly linking psychological science and human-centered XAI.
GLOBE-CE: A Translation-Based Approach for Global Counterfactual Explanations
Ley, Dan, Mishra, Saumitra, Magazzeni, Daniele
Counterfactual explanations have been widely studied in explainability, with a range of application dependent methods prominent in fairness, recourse and model understanding. The major shortcoming associated with these methods, however, is their inability to provide explanations beyond the local or instance-level. While many works touch upon the notion of a global explanation, typically suggesting to aggregate masses of local explanations in the hope of ascertaining global properties, few provide frameworks that are both reliable and computationally tractable. Meanwhile, practitioners are requesting more efficient and interactive explainability tools. We take this opportunity to propose Global & Efficient Counterfactual Explanations (GLOBE-CE), a flexible framework that tackles the reliability and scalability issues associated with current state-of-the-art, particularly on higher dimensional datasets and in the presence of continuous features. Furthermore, we provide a unique mathematical analysis of categorical feature translations, utilising it in our method. Experimental evaluation with publicly available datasets and user studies demonstrate that GLOBE-CE performs significantly better than the current state-of-the-art across multiple metrics (e.g., speed, reliability).
Evaluative Item-Contrastive Explanations in Rankings
Castelnovo, Alessandro, Crupi, Riccardo, Mombelli, Nicolò, Nanino, Gabriele, Regoli, Daniele
The remarkable success of Artificial Intelligence in advancing automated decision-making is evident both in academia and industry. Within the plethora of applications, ranking systems hold significant importance in various domains. This paper advocates for the application of a specific form of Explainable AI -- namely, contrastive explanations -- as particularly well-suited for addressing ranking problems. This approach is especially potent when combined with an Evaluative AI methodology, which conscientiously evaluates both positive and negative aspects influencing a potential ranking. Therefore, the present work introduces Evaluative Item-Contrastive Explanations tailored for ranking systems and illustrates its application and characteristics through an experiment conducted on publicly available data.
Explainable AI in Grassland Monitoring: Enhancing Model Performance and Domain Adaptability
Liu, Shanghua, Hedström, Anna, Basavegowda, Deepak Hanike, Weltzien, Cornelia, Höhne, Marina M. -C.
Grasslands are known for their high biodiversity and ability to provide multiple ecosystem services. Challenges in automating the identification of indicator plants are key obstacles to large-scale grassland monitoring. These challenges stem from the scarcity of extensive datasets, the distributional shifts between generic and grassland-specific datasets, and the inherent opacity of deep learning models. This paper delves into the latter two challenges, with a specific focus on transfer learning and eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approaches to grassland monitoring, highlighting the novelty of XAI in this domain. We analyze various transfer learning methods to bridge the distributional gaps between generic and grassland-specific datasets. Additionally, we showcase how explainable AI techniques can unveil the model's domain adaptation capabilities, employing quantitative assessments to evaluate the model's proficiency in accurately centering relevant input features around the object of interest. This research contributes valuable insights for enhancing model performance through transfer learning and measuring domain adaptability with explainable AI, showing significant promise for broader applications within the agricultural community.