Interpretability is a topic that has been in the spotlight for the past few years. Most existing interpretability techniques produce interpretations in the form of rules or feature importance. These interpretations, while informative, may be harder to understand for non-expert users and therefore, cannot always be considered as adequate explanations. To that end, explanations in natural language are often preferred, as they are easier to comprehend and also more presentable to end-users. This work introduces an early concept for a novel pipeline that can be used in text classification tasks, offering predictions and explanations in natural language. It comprises of two models: a classifier for labelling the text and an explanation generator which provides the explanation. The proposed pipeline can be adopted by any text classification task, given that ground truth rationales are available to train the explanation generator. Our experiments are centred around the tasks of sentiment analysis and offensive language identification in Greek tweets, using a Greek Large Language Model (LLM) to obtain the necessary explanations that can act as rationales. The experimental evaluation was performed through a user study based on three different metrics and achieved promising results for both datasets.

Generating user-friendly explanations regarding why an item is recommended has become increasingly common, largely due to advances in language generation technology, which can enhance user trust and facilitate more informed decision-making when using online services. However, existing explainable recommendation systems focus on using small-size language models. It remains uncertain what impact replacing the explanation generator with the recently emerging large language models (LLMs) would have. Can we expect unprecedented results? In this study, we propose LLMXRec, a simple yet effective two-stage explainable recommendation framework aimed at further boosting the explanation quality by employing LLMs. Unlike most existing LLM-based recommendation works, a key characteristic of LLMXRec is its emphasis on the close collaboration between previous recommender models and LLM-based explanation generators. Specifically, by adopting several key fine-tuning techniques, including parameter-efficient instructing tuning and personalized prompt techniques, controllable and fluent explanations can be well generated to achieve the goal of explanation recommendation. Most notably, we provide three different perspectives to evaluate the effectiveness of the explanations. Finally, we conduct extensive experiments over several benchmark recommender models and publicly available datasets. The experimental results not only yield positive results in terms of effectiveness and efficiency but also uncover some previously unknown outcomes. To facilitate further explorations in this area, the full code and detailed original results are open-sourced at https://github.com/GodFire66666/LLM_rec_explanation/.

Explainable artificial intelligence is proposed to provide explanations for reasoning performed by an Artificial Intelligence. There is no consensus on how to evaluate the quality of these explanations, since even the definition of explanation itself is not clear in the literature. In particular, for the widely known Local Linear Explanations, there are qualitative proposals for the evaluation of explanations, although they suffer from theoretical inconsistencies. The case of image is even more problematic, where a visual explanation seems to explain a decision while detecting edges is what it really does. There are a large number of metrics in the literature specialized in quantitatively measuring different qualitative aspects so we should be able to develop metrics capable of measuring in a robust and correct way the desirable aspects of the explanations. In this paper, we propose a procedure called REVEL to evaluate different aspects concerning the quality of explanations with a theoretically coherent development. This procedure has several advances in the state of the art: it standardizes the concepts of explanation and develops a series of metrics not only to be able to compare between them but also to obtain absolute information regarding the explanation itself. The experiments have been carried out on image four datasets as benchmark where we show REVEL's descriptive and analytical power.

Human brains lie at the core of complex neurobiological systems, where the neurons, circuits, and subsystems interact in enigmatic ways. Understanding the structural and functional mechanisms of the brain has long been an intriguing pursuit for neuroscience research and clinical disorder therapy. Mapping the connections of the human brain as a network is one of the most pervasive paradigms in neuroscience. Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have recently emerged as a potential method for modeling complex network data. Deep models, on the other hand, have low interpretability, which prevents their usage in decision-critical contexts like healthcare. To bridge this gap, we propose an interpretable framework to analyze disorder-specific Regions of Interest (ROIs) and prominent connections. The proposed framework consists of two modules: a brain-network-oriented backbone model for disease prediction and a globally shared explanation generator that highlights disorder-specific biomarkers including salient ROIs and important connections. We conduct experiments on three real-world datasets of brain disorders. The results verify that our framework can obtain outstanding performance and also identify meaningful biomarkers. All code for this work is available at https://github.com/HennyJie/IBGNN.git.

Textual explanations have proved to help improve user satisfaction on machine-made recommendations. However, current mainstream solutions loosely connect the learning of explanation with the learning of recommendation: for example, they are often separately modeled as rating prediction and content generation tasks. In this work, we propose to strengthen their connection by enforcing the idea of sentiment alignment between a recommendation and its corresponding explanation. At training time, the two learning tasks are joined by a latent sentiment vector, which is encoded by the recommendation module and used to make word choices for explanation generation. At both training and inference time, the explanation module is required to generate explanation text that matches sentiment predicted by the recommendation module. Extensive experiments demonstrate our solution outperforms a rich set of baselines in both recommendation and explanation tasks, especially on the improved quality of its generated explanations. More importantly, our user studies confirm our generated explanations help users better recognize the differences between recommended items and understand why an item is recommended.

Natural language explanations (NLEs) are a special form of data annotation in which annotators identify rationales (most significant text tokens) when assigning labels to data instances, and write out explanations for the labels in natural language based on the rationales. NLEs have been shown to capture human reasoning better, but not as beneficial for natural language inference (NLI). In this paper, we analyze two primary flaws in the way NLEs are currently used to train explanation generators for language inference tasks. We find that the explanation generators do not take into account the variability inherent in human explanation of labels, and that the current explanation generation models generate spurious explanations. To overcome these limitations, we propose a novel framework, LIREx, that incorporates both a rationale-enabled explanation generator and an instance selector to select only relevant, plausible NLEs to augment NLI models. When evaluated on the standardized SNLI data set, LIREx achieved an accuracy of 91.87%, an improvement of 0.32 over the baseline and matching the best-reported performance on the data set. It also achieves significantly better performance than previous studies when transferred to the out-of-domain MultiNLI data set. Qualitative analysis shows that LIREx generates flexible, faithful, and relevant NLEs that allow the model to be more robust to spurious explanations. The code is available at https://github.com/zhaoxy92/LIREx.

We are interested in models where actions are deterministic, This can be done through contrastive explanations [5], durationless, and can be performed one at a time. We also which focus on explaining the difference between a factual assume a known initial state and goal. Traditionally, ethical event A and a contrasting event B. To produce these explanations, principles of single decisions are evaluated [1]. In the context one must reason about the hypothetical alternative B, of AI Planning this means analysing a massive number of which likely means constructing an alternative plan where B isolated decisions that may not make sense without the is included rather than A. The original model is constrained context in which they are being made. Therefore, it is to produce a hypothetical planning model (HModel). The preferable to evaluate the ethical contents of a plan as a solution to the HModel is the hypothetical plan (HPlan) that whole. Lindner et al. [2] describe an approach to judging contains the contrast case expected by the user.