Objective: Depth estimation is crucial for endoscopic navigation and manipulation, but obtaining ground-truth depth maps in real clinical scenarios, such as the colon, is challenging. This study aims to develop a robust framework that generalizes well to real colonoscopy images, overcoming challenges like non-Lambertian surface reflection and diverse data distributions. Methods: We propose a framework combining a convolutional neural network (CNN) for capturing local features and a Transformer for capturing global information. An uncertainty-based fusion block was designed to enhance generalization by identifying complementary contributions from the CNN and Transformer branches. The network can be trained with simulated datasets and generalize directly to unseen clinical data without any fine-tuning. Results: Our method is validated on multiple datasets and demonstrates an excellent generalization ability across various datasets and anatomical structures. Furthermore, qualitative analysis in real clinical scenarios confirmed the robustness of the proposed method. Conclusion: The integration of local and global features through the CNN-Transformer architecture, along with the uncertainty-based fusion block, improves depth estimation performance and generalization in both simulated and real-world endoscopic environments. Significance: This study offers a novel approach to estimate depth maps for endoscopy images despite the complex conditions in clinic, serving as a foundation for endoscopic automatic navigation and other clinical tasks, such as polyp detection and segmentation.

Deep learning models for learning analytics have become increasingly popular over the last few years; however, these approaches are still not widely adopted in real-world settings, likely due to a lack of trust and transparency. In this paper, we tackle this issue by implementing explainable AI methods for black-box neural networks. This work focuses on the context of online and blended learning and the use case of student success prediction models. We use a pairwise study design, enabling us to investigate controlled differences between pairs of courses. Our analyses cover five course pairs that differ in one educationally relevant aspect and two popular instance-based explainable AI methods (LIME and SHAP). We quantitatively compare the distances between the explanations across courses and methods. We then validate the explanations of LIME and SHAP with 26 semi-structured interviews of university-level educators regarding which features they believe contribute most to student success, which explanations they trust most, and how they could transform these insights into actionable course design decisions. Our results show that quantitatively, explainers significantly disagree with each other about what is important, and qualitatively, experts themselves do not agree on which explanations are most trustworthy. All code, extended results, and the interview protocol are provided at https://github.com/epfl-ml4ed/trusting-explainers.