Most of the sophisticated AI models utilize huge amounts of annotated data and heavy training to achieve high-end performance. However, there are certain challenges that hinder the deployment of AI models "in-the-wild" scenarios, i.e., inefficient use of unlabeled data, lack of incorporation of human expertise, and lack of interpretation of the results. To mitigate these challenges, we propose a novel Explainable Active Learning (XAL) model, XAL-based semantic segmentation model "SegXAL", that can (i) effectively utilize the unlabeled data, (ii) facilitate the "Human-in-the-loop" paradigm, and (iii) augment the model decisions in an interpretable way. In particular, we investigate the application of the SegXAL model for semantic segmentation in driving scene scenarios. The SegXAL model proposes the image regions that require labeling assistance from Oracle by dint of explainable AI (XAI) and uncertainty measures in a weakly-supervised manner. Specifically, we propose a novel Proximity-aware Explainable-AI (PAE) module and Entropy-based Uncertainty (EBU) module to get an Explainable Error Mask, which enables the machine teachers/human experts to provide intuitive reasoning behind the results and to solicit feedback to the AI system via an active learning strategy. Such a mechanism bridges the semantic gap between man and machine through collaborative intelligence, where humans and AI actively enhance each other's complementary strengths. A novel high-confidence sample selection technique based on the DICE similarity coefficient is also presented within the SegXAL framework. Extensive quantitative and qualitative analyses are carried out in the benchmarking Cityscape dataset. Results show the outperformance of our proposed SegXAL against other state-of-the-art models.

Gaining insights into the preferences of new users and subsequently personalizing recommendations necessitate managing user interactions intelligently, namely, posing pertinent questions to elicit valuable information effectively. In this study, our focus is on a specific scenario of the cold-start problem, where the recommendation system lacks adequate user presence or access to other users' data is restricted, obstructing employing user profiling methods utilizing existing data in the system. We employ Active Learning (AL) to solve the addressed problem with the objective of maximizing information acquisition with minimal user effort. AL operates for selecting informative data from a large unlabeled set to inquire an oracle to label them and eventually updating a machine learning (ML) model. We operate AL in an integrated process of unsupervised, semi-supervised, and supervised ML within an explanatory preference elicitation process. It harvests user feedback (given for the system's explanations on the presented items) over informative samples to update an underlying ML model estimating user preferences. The designed user interaction facilitates personalizing the system by incorporating user feedback into the ML model and also enhances user trust by refining the system's explanations on recommendations. We implement the proposed preference elicitation methodology for food recommendation. We conducted human experiments to assess its efficacy in the short term and also experimented with several AL strategies over synthetic user profiles that we created for two food datasets, aiming for long-term performance analysis. The experimental results demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed preference elicitation with limited user-labeled data while also enhancing user trust through accurate explanations.

Active Learning (AL) is a human-in-the-loop Machine Learning paradigm favored for its ability to learn with fewer labeled instances, but the model's states and progress remain opaque to the annotators. Meanwhile, many recognize the benefits of model transparency for people interacting with ML models, as reflected by the surge of explainable AI (XAI) as a research field. However, explaining an evolving model introduces many open questions regarding its impact on the annotation quality and the annotator's experience. In this paper, we propose a novel paradigm of explainable active learning (XAL), by explaining the learning algorithm's prediction for the instance it wants to learn from and soliciting feedback from the annotator. We conduct an empirical study comparing the model learning outcome, human feedback content and the annotator experience with XAL, to that of traditional AL and coactive learning (providing the model's prediction without the explanation). Our study reveals benefits--supporting trust calibration and enabling additional forms of human feedback, and potential drawbacks--anchoring effect and frustration from transparent model limitations--of providing local explanations in AL. We conclude by suggesting directions for developing explanations that better support annotator experience in AL and interactive ML settings.

Active Learning (AL) is a human-in-the-loop Machine Learning paradigm favored for its ability to learn with fewer labeled instances, but the model's states and progress remain opaque to the annotators. Meanwhile, many recognize the benefits of model transparency for people interacting with ML models, as reflected by the surge of explainable AI (XAI) as a research field. However, explaining an evolving model introduces many open questions regarding its impact on the annotation quality and the annotator's experience. In this paper, we propose a novel paradigm of explainable active learning (XAL), by explaining the learning algorithm's prediction for the instance it wants to learn from and soliciting feedback from the annotator. We conduct an empirical study comparing the model learning outcome, human feedback content and the annotator experience with XAL, to that of traditional AL and coactive learning (providing the model's prediction without the explanation). Our study reveals benefits–supporting trust calibration and enabling additional forms of human feedback, and potential drawbacks–anchoring effect and frustration from transparent model limitations–of providing local explanations in AL.