Explaining time series classification models is crucial, particularly in high-stakes applications such as healthcare and finance, where transparency and trust play a critical role. Although numerous time series classification methods have identified key subsequences, known as shapelets, as core features for achieving stateof-the-art performance and validating their pivotal role in classification outcomes, existing post-hoc time series explanation (PHTSE) methods primarily focus on timestep-level feature attribution. These explanation methods overlook the fundamental prior that classification outcomes are predominantly driven by key shapelets.

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) have been proposed as a compromise between white-box and black-box models, aiming to achieve interpretability without sacrificing accuracy. The standard training procedure for CBMs is to predefine a candidate set of human-interpretable concepts, extract their values from the training data, and identify a sparse subset as inputs to a transparent prediction model. However, such approaches are often hampered by the tradeoff between exploring a sufficiently large set of concepts versus controlling the cost of obtaining concept extractions, resulting in a large interpretability-accuracy tradeoff. This work investigates a novel approach that sidesteps these challenges: BC-LLM iteratively searches over a potentially infinite set of concepts within a Bayesian framework, in which Large Language Models (LLMs) serve as both a concept extraction mechanism and prior. Even though LLMs can be miscalibrated and hallucinate, we prove that BC-LLM can provide rigorous statistical inference and uncertainty quantification. Across image, text, and tabular datasets, BC-LLM outperforms interpretable baselines and even black-box models in certain settings, converges more rapidly towards relevant concepts, and is more robust to out-of-distribution samples.

Explaining black-box models for time series data is critical for the wide-scale adoption of deep learning techniques across domains such as healthcare. Recently, explainability methods for deep time series models have seen significant progress by adopting saliency methods that perturb masked segments of time series to uncover their importance towards the prediction of black-box models. Thus far, such methods have been largely restricted to regular time series. Irregular time series, however, sampled at irregular time intervals and potentially with missing values, are the dominant form of time series in various critical domains (e.g., hospital records). In this paper, we conduct the first evaluation of saliency methods for the interpretation of irregular time series models.

This paper develops a conformal method to compute prediction intervals for nonparametric regression that can automatically adapt to skewed data. Leveraging black-box machine learning algorithms to estimate the conditional distribution of the outcome using histograms, it translates their output into the shortest prediction intervals with approximate conditional coverage. The resulting prediction intervals provably have marginal coverage in finite samples, while asymptotically achieving conditional coverage and optimal length if the black-box model is consistent. Numerical experiments with simulated and real data demonstrate improved performance compared to state-of-the-art alternatives, including conformalized quantile regression and other distributional conformal prediction approaches.

Aligning human-interpretable concepts with the internal representations learned by modern machine learning systems remains a central challenge for interpretable AI. We introduce a geometric framework for comparing supervised human concepts with unsupervised intermediate representations extracted from foundation model embeddings. Motivated by the role of conceptual leaps in scientific discovery, we formalise the notion of concept frustration: a contradiction that arises when an unobserved concept induces relationships between known concepts that cannot be made consistent within an existing ontology. We develop task-aligned similarity measures that detect concept frustration between supervised concept-based models and unsupervised representations derived from foundation models, and show that the phenomenon is detectable in task-aligned geometry while conventional Euclidean comparisons fail. Under a linear-Gaussian generative model we derive a closed-form expression for Bayes-optimal concept-based classifier accuracy, decomposing predictive signal into known-known, known-unknown and unknown-unknown contributions and identifying analytically where frustration affects performance. Experiments on synthetic data and real language and vision tasks demonstrate that frustration can be detected in foundation model representations and that incorporating a frustrating concept into an interpretable model reorganises the geometry of learned concept representations, to better align human and machine reasoning. These results suggest a principled framework for diagnosing incomplete concept ontologies and aligning human and machine conceptual reasoning, with implications for the development and validation of safe interpretable AI for high-risk applications.

Large language models (LLMs) have the potential to generate texts that pose risks of misuse, such as plagiarism, planting fake reviews on e-commerce platforms, or creating inflammatory false tweets. Consequently, detecting whether a text is generated by LLMs has become increasingly important. Existing high-quality detection methods usually require access to the interior of the model to extract the intrinsic characteristics. However, since we do not have access to the interior of the black-box model, we must resort to surrogate models, which impacts detection quality. In order to achieve high-quality detection of black-box models, we would like to extract deep intrinsic characteristics of the black-box model generated texts.

Data-Free Model Extraction (DFME) aims to clone a black-box model without knowing its original training data distribution, making it much easier for attackers to steal commercial models. Defense against DFME faces several challenges: (i) effectiveness; (ii) efficiency; (iii) no prior on the attacker's query data distribution and strategy. However, existing defense methods: (1) are highly computation and memory inefficient; or (2) need strong assumptions about attack data distribution; or (3) can only delay the attack or prove a model theft after the model stealing has happened. In this work, we propose a Memory and Computation efficient defense approach, named MeCo, to prevent DFME from happening while maintaining the model utility simultaneously by distributionally robust defensive training on the target victim model. Specifically, we randomize the input so that it: (1) causes a mismatch of the knowledge distillation loss for attackers; (2) disturbs the zeroth-order gradient estimation; (3) changes the label prediction for the attack query data. Therefore, the attacker can only extract misleading information from the black-box model. Extensive experiments on defending against both decision-based and score-based DFME demonstrate that MeCo can significantly reduce the effectiveness of existing DFME methods and substantially improve running efficiency.