Most of the work on interpretable machine learning has focused on designing either inherently interpretable models, which typically trade-off accuracy for interpretability, or post-hoc explanation systems, whose explanation quality can be unpredictable. Our method, ExpO, is a hybridization of these approaches that regularizes a model for explanation quality at training time. Importantly, these regularizers are differentiable, model agnostic, and require no domain knowledge to define. We demonstrate that post-hoc explanations for ExpO-regularized models have better explanation quality, as measured by the common fidelity and stability metrics. We verify that improving these metrics leads to significantly more useful explanations with a user study on a realistic task.

The prevalence of misinformation on social media threatens public trust, demanding automated fact-checking systems that provide accurate verdicts with interpretable explanations. However, existing large language model-based (LLM-based) approaches often rely heavily on external knowledge sources, introducing substantial latency and even hallucinations that undermine reliability, interpretability, and responsiveness, which is crucial for real-time use. To address these challenges, we propose REason-guided Fact-checking with Latent EXplanations REFLEX paradigm, a plug-and-play, self-refining paradigm that leverages the internal knowledge in backbone model to improve both verdict accuracy and explanation quality. REFLEX reformulates fact-checking as a role-play dialogue and jointly trains verdict prediction and explanation generation. It adaptively extracts contrastive activation pairs between the backbone model and its fine-tuned variant to construct steering vectors that disentangle truth into style and substance naturally. These activation-level signals guide inference and suppress noisy explanations, enabling more faithful and efficient reasoning. Experiments on real-world datasets show that REFLEX outperforms previous methods that steer toward a single truth direction and underscores the challenge traditional approaches face when handling the subtle, human-unknown truth in fact-checking tasks. Remarkably, with only 465 self-refined training samples, RELFEX achieves state-of-the-art performance. Furthermore, models trained with explanatory objectives can effectively guide those without them, yielding up to a 7.57% improvement, highlighting that internal explanation signals play a dual role in both interpreting and enhancing factual reasoning.

Abstract--This study examines whether Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) fine-tuned Large Language Models (LLMs) can approximate the performance of fully fine-tuned models in generating human-interpretable decisions and explanations for malware classification. Achieving trustworthy malware detection, particularly when LLMs are involved, remains a significant challenge. We developed an evaluation framework using Bilingual Evaluation Understudy (BLEU), Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation (ROUGE), and Semantic Similarity Metrics to benchmark explanation quality across five LoRA configurations and a fully fine-tuned baseline. Results indicate that full fine-tuning achieves the highest overall scores, with BLEU and ROUGE improvements of up to 10% over LoRA variants. However, mid-range LoRA models deliver competitive performance--exceeding full fine-tuning on two metrics--while reducing model size by approximately 81% and training time by over 80% on a LoRA model with 15.5% trainable parameters. These findings demonstrate that LoRA offers a practical balance of interpretability and resource efficiency, enabling deployment in resource-constrained environments without sacrificing explanation quality. By providing feature-driven natural language explanations for malware classifications, this approach enhances transparency, analyst confidence, and operational scalability in malware detection systems. Modern AI-based malware detection systems often lack trustworthiness, particularly when LLMs are involved, limiting analysts' ability to validate automated decisions and improve detection strategies.

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have opened new possibilities for recommendation systems, though current approaches such as TALLRec face challenges in explainability and cold-start scenarios. We present ExplainRec, a framework that extends LLM-based recommendation capabilities through preference attribution, multi-modal fusion, and zero-shot transfer learning. The framework incorporates four technical contributions: preference attribution tuning for explainable recommendations, zero-shot preference transfer for cold-start users and items, multi-modal enhancement leveraging visual and textual content, and multi-task collaborative optimization. Experimental evaluation on MovieLens-25M and Amazon datasets shows that ExplainRec outperforms existing methods, achieving AUC improvements of 0.7\% on movie recommendation and 0.9\% on cross-domain tasks, while generating interpretable explanations and handling cold-start scenarios effectively.

Large Language Models (LLMs) with extended context windows promise direct reasoning over long documents, reducing the need for chunking or retrieval. Constructing annotated resources for training and evaluation, however, remains costly. Synthetic data offers a scalable alternative, and we introduce SynClaimEval, a framework for evaluating synthetic data utility in long-context claim verification -- a task central to hallucination detection and fact-checking. Our framework examines three dimensions: (i) input characteristics, by varying context length and testing generalization to out-of-domain benchmarks; (ii) synthesis logic, by controlling claim complexity and error type variation; and (iii) explanation quality, measuring the degree to which model explanations provide evidence consistent with predictions. Experiments across benchmarks show that long-context synthesis can improve verification in base instruction-tuned models, particularly when augmenting existing human-written datasets. Moreover, synthesis enhances explanation quality, even when verification scores do not improve, underscoring its potential to strengthen both performance and explainability.

Feature attribution has gained prominence as a tool for explaining model decisions, yet evaluating explanation quality remains challenging due to the absence of ground-truth explanations. To circumvent this, explanation-guided input manipulation has emerged as an indirect evaluation strategy, measuring explanation effectiveness through the impact of input modifications on model outcomes during inference. Despite the widespread use, a major concern with inference-based schemes is the distribution shift caused by such manipulations, which undermines the reliability of their assessments. The retraining-based scheme ROAR overcomes this issue by adapting the model to the altered data distribution. However, its evaluation results often contradict the theoretical foundations of widely accepted explainers. This work investigates this misalignment between empirical observations and theoretical expectations. In particular, we identify the sign issue as a key factor responsible for residual information that ultimately distorts retraining-based evaluation. Based on the analysis, we show that a straightforward reframing of the evaluation process can effectively resolve the identified issue. Building on the existing framework, we further propose novel variants that jointly structure a comprehensive perspective on explanation evaluation. These variants largely improve evaluation efficiency over the standard retraining protocol, thereby enhancing practical applicability for explainer selection and benchmarking. Following our proposed schemes, empirical results across various data scales provide deeper insights into the performance of carefully selected explainers, revealing open challenges and future directions in explainability research.

Software testing is a critical component in the software engineering field and is important for software engineering education. Thus, it is vital for academia to continuously improve and update educational methods to reflect the current state of the field. The International Software Testing Qualifications Board (ISTQB) certification framework is globally recognized and widely adopted in industry and academia. However, ISTQB-based learning has been rarely applied with recent generative artificial intelligence advances. Despite the growing capabilities of large language models (LLMs), ISTQB-based learning and instruction with LLMs have not been thoroughly explored. This paper explores and evaluates how LLMs can complement the ISTQB framework for higher education. The findings present four key contributions: (i) the creation of a comprehensive ISTQB-aligned dataset spanning over a decade, consisting of 28 sample exams and 1,145 questions; (ii) the development of a domain-optimized prompt that enhances LLM precision and explanation quality on ISTQB tasks; (iii) a systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs on this dataset; and (iv) actionable insights and recommendations for integrating LLMs into software testing education. These findings highlight the promise of LLMs in supporting ISTQB certification preparation and offer a foundation for their broader use in software engineering at higher education.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate textual explanations of process models discovered from event logs. Producing explanations from large behavioral abstractions (e.g., directly-follows graphs or Petri nets) can be computationally expensive. This paper reports an exploratory evaluation of explanation quality under progressive behavioral-input reduction, where models are discovered from progressively smaller prefixes of a fixed log. Our pipeline (i) discovers models at multiple input sizes, (ii) prompts an LLM to generate explanations, and (iii) uses a second LLM to assess completeness, bottleneck identification, and suggested improvements. On synthetic logs, explanation quality is largely preserved under moderate reduction, indicating a practical cost-quality trade-off. The study is exploratory, as the scores are LLM-based (comparative signals rather than ground truth) and the data are synthetic. The results suggest a path toward more computationally efficient, LLM-assisted process analysis in resource-constrained settings.

O, is a hybridization of these approaches that regularizes a model for explanation quality at training time.