Explaining why a specific outcome occurred, and which inputs deserve the blame or credit, is central to philosophical, scientific, and policy analysis. Existing tools split into two camps. The theory of actual causality (AC) gives principled verdicts, but only for toy-sized models, because computing them requires enumerating counterfactual scenarios. Scalable attribution methods like SHAP (or even causal SHAP) at least partially ignore the causal structure that generated the data, and can give answers that conflict with a careful causal analysis. We close this gap with Probabilistic Causal Impact (PCI). PCI builds on actual causality and on Pearl's notions of probability of necessity and sufficiency, but recasts the question of explainability as an estimation problem on a probabilistic causal model that is easily approximated via Monte Carlo. By specifying a distribution over "candidate explanations," a distribution over counterfactual values, and a scoring function, PCI provides tractable, causally grounded, graded explanations, generalizing AC and Pearl's probability of causation as degenerate cases. We evaluate PCI in synthetic and real-world examples, spanning consistency checks with AC, scaling experiments, complex continuous-valued dynamical systems, and a real-world deployed causal machine learning model trained on millions of datapoints.
Federated Learning (FL) with Differential Privacy (DP) is increasingly adopted to preserve data confidentiality in distributed machine learning. However, DP noise distorts learned representations and degrades explanation fidelity, limiting differentially private FL where trustworthy explanations are required, such as assistive clinical diagnosis. Prior work adapted DP noise with static feature-importance signals, restricting explainability to post hoc analysis and precluding noise calibration to explanation quality during training. We propose XCal-FL, a closed-loop, explainability-driven local training algorithm for image classification in cross-silo FL that dynamically calibrates DP noise from three complementary signals: (1) prediction logit variations, measuring causal influence on model confidence, (2) counterfactual margins, capturing decision-boundary sensitivity, and (3) saliency concentration, quantifying spatial coherence of model attention, while enforcing formal DP guarantees via adaptive privacy accounting. Experiments on three medical imaging datasets across varying FL configurations show that XCal-FL yields more accurate and interpretable global models, improving predictive performance by over 10\% and explanation fidelity by up to 5$\times$ over static-noise FL, and outperforming state-of-the-art adaptive DP methods in fidelity. XCal-FL also achieves higher privacy-budget efficiency, turning each unit of cumulative privacy loss into larger gains in both accuracy and explanation fidelity. Our analysis further reveals that, unlike predictive performance, which scales roughly linearly with privacy loss, explanation fidelity exhibits non-linear dynamics. These findings suggest explainability is a distinct dimension of the privacy trade-off that cannot be inferred from utility alone, with implications for training and privacy-budget allocation in decision-critical applications.
Unsupervised anomaly detection scores each point of an unlabelled, contaminated sample in a single pass, and increasingly must also explain why a point is flagged. Yet the dominant detectors give a score with no account of which features drive it, and explanations are bolted on post-hoc with SHAP or LIME, which re-query the detector thousands of times per point and only approximate it. We introduce WAND, an unsupervised tabular anomaly detector that is explainable by design. WAND organises its computation around directions on the unit sphere, scoring each point by how far its projection escapes a sub-Gaussian extreme-value baseline. The originality of our approach is that the witness directions that flag a point, being vectors in feature space, are its explanation, a per-feature attribution obtained at no cost over scoring and, since the score is differentiable, recoverable by gradients. Scoring is linear in the sample size, and a probe-efficiency bound guarantees every anomaly a witness, hence an explanation. Across 47 ADBench datasets WAND attains the best mean Friedman rank at ROC-AUC parity with 16 unsupervised baselines, so the gain is interpretability at no accuracy cost; its native explanations are more accurate and faithful than post-hoc SHAP/LIME and ECOD at a fraction of the query cost. WAND is thus a practical, interpretable solution for explainable anomaly detection.
Louis Chen, Torbjörn E. M. Nordlingcs.CV cs.AI eess.IV
Background. Remote photoplethysmography estimates the cardiovascular pulse from facial video, and its explanations have rested on inspecting heatmaps rather than on quantitative evidence about where a model reads it. We quantified the explanations and asked whether such explanations transfer between datasets and track model performance. Method. We trained eight condition-specific RhythmFormer models on NCKU-rPPG, recorded under three illumination levels, speaking, rotation, and cycling, estimated one heart rate per 5.12-second clip, and set them beside a UBFC-rPPG reproduction. Raw attention, rollout, attention flow, and Beyond Intuition were assessed by skin coverage and the Salience-guided Faithfulness Coefficient (SaCo). Results. Beyond Intuition ranked highest on both datasets, at median coverage 0.789 and SaCo 0.837 on Static level 3 against 0.826 and 0.917 on UBFC-rPPG; lower ranks differed. Within one participant of one condition, neither measure was related to a clip's heart-rate error, waveform correlation, or signal-to-noise ratio on either dataset: 186 of the 252 coefficients fell below $|ρ|=0.10$ and 28 reached $p<0.05$ against the 13 expected by chance. Across the eight scenarios only Beyond Intuition's coverage followed the three performance measures, at $ρ=-0.43$, $+0.57$, and $+0.43$, while the attention-only methods' SaCo ran opposite to each. It failed at 40 lux alone, its median coverage falling to 0.180 and its median SaCo to $-0.178$, whereas motion degraded the estimates far more without such a drop. Conclusions. Skin coverage and SaCo carry information complementary to the performance measures rather than a proxy for them: attributing to the skin does not guarantee an accurate estimate. What an attribution reveals about a condition is where the model looks rather than how faithfully its map is ordered.
Deep learning models have achieved impressive performance in medical image diagnosis, yet their deployment in clinical settings remains constrained by limited explainability. Counterfactual images provide one means of auditing model behavior by showing how an image would need to change for a classifier to produce a different prediction. Existing approaches typically generate such explanations using auxiliary models, including generative adversarial networks and diffusion models. While often capable of producing visually realistic images, these methods explain one black-box model using another, making it difficult to separate the classifier's decision-making process from the inductive biases of the generator. We propose a novel counterfactual-generation framework that requires no generative model. Instead, counterfactuals are constructed directly from causal evidence extracted from the classifier. The resulting approach is deterministic, requires no additional model training, and enables controllable edits within user-specified regions of interest. Experiments on real-world medical imaging datasets demonstrate that the proposed method successfully changes classifier predictions while remaining closer to the original image than generative baselines, providing a more direct and transparent view of the classifier's decision boundary.
We study body-only, 12-class acted-emotion classification from skeleton motion under leave-performer-out (LPO) evaluation, a hard, underdetermined setting: chance is 8.3%, and a protocol-matched reproduced STGCN++ baseline reaches only 25.73 +/- 4.03% Macro-F1. We show that reliable gains come not from a new architecture but from combining eleven models with orthogonal error modes: under 10-fold LPO cross-validation on the labeled training performers, an equal-weight logit-mean ensemble reaches 36.80 +/- 4.00% per-fold Macro-F1, a protocol-matched +11.07 pp (+43% relative) over the same-split reproduced baseline. Our central contribution is a tested explanation suite: for a strong ensemble member, part-masking and counterfactual edits show (rather than assert) that its decisions depend on motion-grounded body-region evidence, and this region saliency aligns with rule-based Laban Movement Analysis (LMA) attributes far more than with classical kinematics: region-level saliency-LMA Spearman rho = +0.500 versus +0.033, roughly 15x, and the alignment holds for the submitted 11-way ensemble itself at rho = +0.517; the audit is post hoc and needs no retraining. The same suite faithfully reports a negative: within-window temporal saliency is diffuse rather than localized.
Argumentation frameworks are useful tools for representing and reasoning with information in a variety of settings, e.g. in supplementing AI models as they perform classification tasks, with a notable benefit of providing additional explainability. In this paper, we introduce contrastive explanations for Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs), one such formalism. Unlike most existing explanations for QBAFs, which explain the reasoning outcome of a single argument of interest (i.e. a topic argument), contrastive explanations explain the difference between two topic arguments. We introduce a general form of contrastive attribution functions (CAFs) and establish a set of general properties they should satisfy. We introduce CAFs based on removal, gradients and Shapley-values, and study their properties. Finally, to illustrate contrastive explanations, we demonstrate their usefulness in healthcare and bias identification settings.
Summaiya Unnisa Begum, Mohammed Nadeem Ullah, Mohammed Abdul Ghani Khancs.LG
Carbon markets put a price on emissions, yet that price remains hard to forecast. Work in this area clusters on the EU and Chinese schemes, compresses regulatory text into a sentiment score, and reports accuracy without calibration or explanation stability. We distil ten recurring gaps into an impact-feasibility matrix and propose EPA-CarbonNet, a six-layer architecture that fuses market series with policy text by cross-attention and calibrated intervals alongside policy-attributed explanations. We then build and test it on eleven years of daily S and P carbon index data. The findings are largely negative, and reported as measured: a random walk beats the model on five-day RMSE (0.0365 against 0.0475), SHAP rankings agree at rho = 0.54 across resampled backgrounds, and policy attention never coincides with documented regulatory events. Directional accuracy, at 58.6 percent, leads every baseline. Code, data documentation and all result artifacts are available at https://github.com/Kimalice/Toward-Explainable-and-Policy-Aware-AI-for-Carbon-Credit-Price-Prediction
Andres F. Monsalve, Hernan A. Moreno, Christian D. Kummerowphysics.ao-ph cs.CV stat.AP
Historically, retrieving rainfall data from satellite imagery has been the domain of space agencies. However, in recent years, the development of cheaper, more compact satellites (SmallSats) capable of detecting rainfall proxies has led to a significant increase in private-sector initiatives for satellite launch and surface precipitation products. This rapid growth has yet to be matched by data validation efforts. Consequently, the need for a robust tool to detect anomalies in near-real-time data before it is disseminated to the public has become critical. In this paper, we present the development of an anomaly-detection system to identify artifacts in global satellite-based rainfall products. The developed framework leverages pre-trained computer vision models and incorporates scarce human-labeled data to detect specific anomalies. Our proposed anomaly detection strategy is tested on data from the Special Sensor Microwave Imager (SSMI) and the Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS). Results demonstrate the efficacy of our approach at separating regular orbits from artifact-containing orbits for each satellite, with performance comparable to state-of-the-art in-place methods. Additionally, the framework offers explainability and the capacity for iterative refinement following false-positive or false-negative classifications.
Vision Transformer (ViT) design has become increasingly diverse, with backbones combining convolutional stems, windowed, linear, or multi-axis attention, patch merging, and spatial reduction in various configurations. This diversity poses challenges for existing attribution methods, whose assumptions often do not hold across ViT variants: Grad-CAM requires a terminal spatial feature map, attention rollout assumes global softmax attention, and layer-wise relevance propagation (LRP) requires module-specific rules. To the best of our knowledge, no existing method provides a unified attribution framework across this architectural space. We show that this architectural diversity can be captured by a simpler underlying structure. The attention and resolution-reduction operators in current ViTs can be decomposed into four operation types: linear maps, bilinear mixing, normalization or gating, and reindexing. Each operation admits a relevance rule that satisfies conservation. Based on these rules, HiLRP supports new backbones by construction rather than by architecture-specific derivation, and its attribution maps decompose the prediction rather than relying on heuristic assumptions. We prove conservation and conditional equivariance and verify both to machine precision. Across 14 attribution methods and 10 architectures, we find that no prior method remains reliable across ViT families, while Faithfulness Correlation becomes uninformative for backbones robust to spatial masking. HiLRP alone preserves conservation across windowed, spatial-reduction, multi-axis, and linear-attention models, where naive extensions can produce zero or inflated relevance. It also localizes attribution failures in class activation mapping, achieving 0.97 Pointing compared with 0.55 for competing methods on EfficientViT.
Reliable disaster damage assessment requires models that provide both accurate predictions and transparent explanations. However, existing multimodal approaches are limited by scarce annotated data and insufficient evaluation of reasoning quality. This study proposes a two-stage training framework that integrates Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) within a unified data construction pipeline. From a single Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) annotation workflow, two complementary datasets are derived, namely ReasoningSet, which contains validated rationales for SFT, and PreferenceSet, which comprises paired rationales for DPO-based alignment. The framework evaluates both classification performance and explanation quality using automatic metrics, model-based scoring, and human ranking. Experimental results show that SFT improves accuracy from 73.64% to 78.29% and increases Macro-F1 by 29% compared to the baseline, while explanation quality improves by approximately 25%. Subsequent DPO alignment further enhances interpretability on the PreferenceSet. Cross-model validation on InternVL-3-8B and LLaVA-1.5-7B demonstrates the robustness and generalizability of the approach. The proposed framework improves detection of underrepresented mild damage cases, reduces high-risk misclassifications, and strengthens alignment between model reasoning and human judgment. Overall, it provides a reproducible pathway to develop reliable multimodal systems that deliver auditable, actionable disaster insights for emergency management.
The next generation of mobile networks is envisioned as fully AI-native, with AI-RAN architectures embedding small language models (SLMs) to perform reasoning over real-time telemetry. The state-of-the-art training paradigms for telecom LLMs, exemplified by RANSTRUCT-style supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on curated instruction data, are limited to post hoc rationalization. Here, the explanations, when produced at all, are generated after or independently of the decision, leaving the decision process unauditable. Pre-hoc reasoning, where a causal reasoning trace is produced before the output label, is preferable, and the broader LLM reasoning literature has made real progress toward it via RL methods such as Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). Here we observe that transplanting this recipe into the telecom setting runs into a cold-start barrier: SLMs either learn to output the desired format or learn to predict the label, but rarely both. We identify this barrier and propose CRAFT, which stands for Cold-start Reasoning Alignment via Fine-Tuning, a data-centric method to autonomously generate a verified dataset of (input, trace, label) triplets. CRAFT fine-tunes SLMs on this verified data using low-rank adaptation (LoRA), requiring substantially less compute and wall-clock time than GRPO-based methods. On the TRACTOR and IC xApp telecom datasets, CRAFT achieves up to 86.5% and 94.6% for accuracy and F1 with no parse failures, while direct GRPO and SFT+GRPO fail to exceed 28% and 53.5% F1 with multiple parse failures. We further show that CRAFT-initialized policies serve as a robust foundation for subsequent GRPO fine-tuning, as under diverse reward functions the performance remains consistent with no parse failures. Finally, we demonstrate that CRAFT consumes 59% less energy than GRPO-based baselines, making it a sustainable path to deployable, auditable AI in 6G RAN.
Eddie Conti, Claudio Daka, Álvaro Parafita +3cs.LG cs.AI
Feature importance Methods (FIMs) are widely used in Explainable AI to interpret model predictions, yet attribution scores alone often provide limited insight into the underlying reasoning process. In this work, we introduce a novel perspective by embedding FIMs within a hypothesis-testing framework based on Weight of Evidence (WoE). We quantify how strongly the observed evidence supports any given hypothesis on feature importance. The reference hypothesis can stem from domain knowledge, ground truth, or be derived from the FIM itself. This formulation enables a principled evaluation of FIMs, capturing both their alignment with prior knowledge and their variability. We further provide theoretical results linking WoE to attribution variance. Empirical results shows the applicability and flexibility of our strategy analyzing LIME and SHAP explanations in settings with different reference hypotheses. Overall, our framework offers a complementary tool for assessing FIMs through a contrastive, evidence-based lens.
Large language models (LLMs) are used as post hoc explainers of sequential decision-making policies, producing natural-language explanations of why an action was chosen. However, LLMs often generate plausible but incorrect statements, and no existing approach systematically tests whether such explanations are faithful to the underlying environment. Two classic software testing challenges stand in the way: there is no oracle for the correctness of an explanation, and the test inputs, natural language queries about a policy's behavior, lack the structure needed for systematic test case generation. We address both. Probabilistic model checking provides the test oracle, computing exact reference results against which LLM answers are graded automatically. A taxonomy of post hoc query categories structures the input space around the environment-level facts from which policy explanations are composed; test cases generated from it are prioritized by question-specific diagnostic difficulty scores. Across seven MDP environments, the testing separates three open-weight LLMs: a reasoning model passes 85% of test cases, a mid-size model 70%, and a 1B model falls below the random baseline, while prioritization surfaces significantly harder cases than random selection. Our results indicate how trustworthy LLM-generated explanations are in model-free settings, where the same LLMs are used but no oracle exists to verify them.
Next-basket repurchase recommendation is commonly formulated as a ranking task: given a customer's purchase history, the system ranks previously purchased items that may be needed again. In production settings, however, ranking accuracy is only one component of recommendation quality. Customers may also benefit from concise evidence about why an item is recommended now. Large language models (LLMs) offer a potential way to surface such evidence through feature-based, human-readable rationales grounded in interpretable behavioral signals. We construct repurchase features spanning cadence, frequency, recency, user behavior, and item popularity, and evaluate LLMs on two public grocery datasets and one proprietary retail dataset. We investigate (1) whether off-the-shelf LLMs can use these features as next-basket scorers relative to heuristic and supervised rankers, and (2) whether LLM-cited features carry outcome-grounded ranking signal. For the latter, we compare LLM-cited features with model-specific attribution methods under a cross-model feature-masking protocol that measures ranking degradation after masking selected features. Our results show that LLM scores are not competitive with supervised rankers, suggesting that off-the-shelf LLMs should not be used as standalone repurchase recommenders. However, changes in prompt and evidence representation can improve outcome-grounded feature-masking results in some settings even when ranking performance does not improve; the effect is dataset-dependent and does not consistently match attribution baselines. These findings suggest a practical role for LLMs as validated explanation components rather than primary rankers, with rationale quality evaluated separately from ranking accuracy.
Evaluating data-text alignment remains challenging: existing metrics often provide limited explanations for the scores, while prompt-based LLM-as-Judge methods can be expensive and unreliable. We present an end-to-end explainable evaluation metric that fine-tunes a language model to identify omitted, extra, incorrect, and correct data units in a data-text pair. These local judgements are aggregated into precision, recall, and F1 scores, providing both fine-grained diagnostic feedback and an interpretable measure of alignment quality. Across benchmarks, our fine-tuned models outperform LLM-as-Judge methods in error prediction and achieve competitive precision, recall, and F1 scores, while maintaining strong correlation with human judgements. Beyond evaluation, our verifier outputs also provide useful feedback signals for downstream correction and refinement, supporting alignment-oriented improvement of data-to-text and text-to-data. Code and resources are available at https://github.com/guihuzhang/xqdt.
Temporal inconsistencies, such as mandates attributed outside their real interval, events presented as past before they occurred, or inverted causal sequences, are a form of political disinformation that evades style-based fake news detectors: a well-written article with a single wrong date carries no lexical signal of falsehood. This paper introduces the Temporal Coherence Score (TCS), a continuous, intrinsically interpretable metric that quantifies the temporal coherence of a news article, computed by a four-stage pipeline: extraction of temporal facts, construction of a temporal knowledge graph, hierarchical verification against internal consistency rules and external reference sources, and score aggregation with automatically generated explanations. Verification combines eight internal checkers derived from Allen's interval algebra with a five-level external hierarchy ranging from a locally stored reference knowledge base of 1{,}256 curated political facts to live Wikidata SPARQL queries. On a benchmark of 100 political news articles with injected temporal errors, the system reaches a precision of 0.909 at the selected operating threshold, with a single residual false positive, a profile deliberately tuned for human-in-the-loop fact-checking assistance, where false alarms are costlier than missed detections. Unlike lexical baselines that output only a binary label, every flagged article is accompanied by the inconsistency type, the entities involved, and the reference source that contradicts the claim.
Anh Nguyen Quynh, Khang Nguyen Quoc, Luyl-Da Quachcs.CV
Shrimp disease classification has become an urgent issue due to its significant impact on the import-export output of producing countries, particularly Vietnam. Most existing studies focus on image-based classification, which typically operates at the late stage of disease manifestation. Therefore, text-based classification has the potential to enable early and timely disease detection. To address this limitation, we introduce the SALT (Shrimp disease text Analysis with multi-Loss disTillation) framework, which incorporates explainability analysis using Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME) and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to evaluate model predictions and interpret the learned linguistic features. Experimental results demonstrate that SALT achieves competitive performance across multiple distillation objectives, outperforming supervised baselines while providing a favorable trade-off between predictive performance and computational efficiency. Moreover, it exhibits strong explainability, accurately identifying key linguistic features and semantic patterns relevant to disease descriptions. These findings highlight the potential of knowledge distillation-based text classification for future applications in early shrimp disease diagnosis and related research directions.
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a major cause of preventable blindness, creating a need for accurate and trustworthy automated screening. This study investigates an explainable DR classification framework using vision foundation models and multiple transfer learning strategies. Three backbones, DINOv2, CLIP, and Vision Transformer (ViT), were evaluated using full fine-tuning, linear probing, and Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA). Models were trained and internally evaluated on the ODIR dataset and externally evaluated on APTOS to assess generalization. DINOv2-LoRA achieved the highest internal AUROC of 0.758, while DINOv2 full fine-tuning and ViT full fine-tuning achieved the highest external AUROC of 0.920. Calibration was further assessed using reliability analysis after isotonic regression. For explainability, Grad-CAM and HiResCAM were evaluated against expert-annotated lesion masks from the IDRiD dataset using Dice, Intersection over Union (IoU), and Pointing Game metrics. The results demonstrate that foundation models, particularly DINOv2, can provide strong predictive performance, while LoRA offers a parameter-efficient alternative to full fine-tuning. Quantitative evaluation of explanation maps further supports the assessment of whether model attention corresponds to clinically relevant retinal lesions.
Anja Witte, Maximilian Lennartz, Jan Baumbach +4cs.CV cs.LG
Vision Foundation Models (VFMs) are widely used in computational pathology but remain sensitive to domain shifts arising from variations in staining, tissue preparation, and scanner hardware. A key limitation is that VFM embeddings entangle biological with domain-specific information, hindering cross-domain generalization. We propose Explainable Probing of Cross-Domain Sparse Embeddings (EXPOSE), a framework that uses Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) as an explainable bottleneck to identify and suppress domain-specific components in VFM embeddings. We train a sparse representation of VFM features, use a linear classifier to identify domain-specific latent dimensions, and mask these features prior to downstream relapse prediction without retraining the backbone model. Experiments on a large prostate cancer dataset with multiple acquisition domains show that SAE features capture both domain- and task-specific information, which are partially disentangled in the latent space. Removing domain-specific features improves cross-domain performance and increases embedding robustness as measured by the Domain Robustness Index (DoRI). Code is available at https://github.com/imsb-uke/expose .
Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) increasingly calls for actionable counterfactual recourse, yet current methodologies face challenges related to causal invalidity, excessive cognitive burden, and predictive failure. Exhaustive causal search algorithms often require modifications to multiple attributes, whereas additive attribution-guided methods, such as SHAP, ignore higher-order feature synergies, leading to suboptimal predictive momentum and diffuse intervention effort in complex nonlinear models, such as XGBoost. To bridge this gap, we introduce actionable case-based feature importance (A-CBFI), a diagnosis-prescription integrated framework for tabular machine learning. Grounded in structural causal models (SCMs), A-CBFI isolates synergistic interaction bottlenecks and releases suppressive structural locks, translating them into targeted interventions. By mathematically separating the active user intervention space (L_{\mathrm{active}}) from downstream effects and concentrating over 98.3% of the intervention effort on diagnosed root causes, A-CBFI enables highly targeted interventions. Empirical evaluations across the financial and healthcare domains demonstrate that A-CBFI reduces the active human intervention burden by 76.9% while maintaining comparable global recourse cost to exhaustive causal baselines. By prioritizing the diagnosed causal bottlenecks, A-CBFI provides targeted and actionable recourse while maintaining causal validity and achieving full relative convergence across all causally feasible instances.
Multi-label graph learning intends to capture the intrinsic complexity of real-world applications, where one sample is often related to multiple groups or consists of multiple objects. To date, a handful of multi-label graph learning methods exist, but none of them integrate training-time interpretation capability. While post-hoc graph explainers have been developed, they do not explicitly model label-dependent evidence sharing in multi-label graph learners, especially when label pairs are weakly or negatively associated. As a result, post-hoc approaches may miss how evidence should be shared or separated across different labels. This paper advances a new end-to-end self-explainable multi-label graph neural network (SEMGNN), which aims to simultaneously classify multi-labeled nodes and identify edges significantly contributing to each target node w.r.t. predicted labels. Different from post-hoc methods, SEMGNN jointly learns a predictor and a sparse edge-mask explainer within a unified framework and training objective. Label-label correlations are used to improve multi-label node classification and enhance individual label explanations, so that different labels of a node can be supported by distinct yet coherent structural and/or correlated evidence. Experiments and comparisons on synthetic and real-world multi-label networks, in social networking, entertainment, and life sciences, show that SEMGNN achieves competitive or improved predictive performance while providing more faithful and compact label-conditioned explanations.
Roshan Prakash Rane, Marco Simnacher, Manuel Pfeuffer +7cs.LG cs.AI cs.CV stat.ML
Deep neural networks often exploit spurious associations, a failure known as shortcut learning. Auditing for shortcuts requires testing many candidate concepts, such as acquisition settings or demographics. Current concept-based explainability methods test one concept at a time, asking whether it is decodable from a layer. These methods flag concepts that are merely correlated with the outcome or with each other, and their scores are not comparable across layers or concept types. We introduce ICON decomposition, which quantifies how much of a layer's variance each concept explains given all other concepts and the outcome, and how much none of them explains, yielding layer-comparable, calibrated scores that suppress false positives. On simulated data, ICON recovers concept importance more accurately than seven existing methods. On skin-cancer models with inserted artifacts, it detects induced shortcuts where baselines report false positives. On two brain-imaging models, ICON's sparse explanations are validated by retraining and out-of-distribution tests.
Explaining deep learning models operating on time series data is crucial in various applications that require transparent and interpretable insights into model behavior. {Existing explanation methods generally fall into two categories: attribution-based explanations, which identify the temporal regions most responsible for a prediction, and counterfactual explanations, which reveal how an input should be modified to alter the model's decision.} {Despite valuable insights, these two fields are largely studied independently. This disconnect leaves attribution methods lacking causal validation, while counterfactual methods suffer from severe instability, producing adversarial-like noise instead of meaningful explanations.} In this work, we revisit time-series explainability from an information-theoretic perspective and show that existing explainers are vulnerable to trivial solutions and distributional shifts. To address these limitations, we propose a unified objective function for explainable time series learning that bridges attribution and counterfactual reasoning within a single framework. Building upon the Information Bottleneck principle, our formulation explicitly prevents trivial explanations and out-of-distribution counterfactuals. {Based on this objective function, we introduce {\modelname}, a novel explanation framework that learns a parametric transformation network to construct explanation-embedded instances, where preserved information yields attribution explanations and controlled information removal produces stable counterfactual explanations.} We evaluate {\modelname} on synthetic and real-world benchmarks against state-of-the-art baselines. Extensive quantitative and qualitative results show that {\modelname} consistently outperforms competing methods, yielding faithful attributions and stable counterfactual explanations.
Drug synergy prediction estimates whether two drugs produce a stronger joint effect than expected from their individual activities. For drug combination discovery, a single synergy score is often not enough: researchers also need to know which molecular regions jointly drive the prediction. We study motif-pair synergy explanation, which identifies pairs of chemically coherent regions, one from each drug, that jointly contribute to predicted synergy. Existing interpretable synergy models expose atom- or substructure-level signals, but their explanations are built into the predictor architecture, and none validates cross-drug region scores under repeated perturbations or feeds that evidence back to refine the explanation. A reliable motif-pair explanation should instead be chemically coherent, perturbation-stable, and aligned with predictor behavior. We introduce VINCENT (Validated Interaction Network for Cross-drug Explanation of Therapeutics), a post-training framework for a fixed interaction-aware synergy predictor. VINCENT extracts atom-pair evidence from attention and gradient signals, groups atoms into chemically coherent motifs, and validates candidate motif pairs through repeated local perturbations. The validated evidence is fed back to refine motif assignments, yielding explanations that satisfy these three criteria. On a 25-pair literature-annotated subset, VINCENT achieves a mean motif recall of 0.826 (95% CI: 0.78-0.87), compared with 0.49-0.66 for baselines. Across all 71 test pairs, its validated interaction scores yield a TP/TN separation of 3.36. These results show that closed-loop perturbation validation recovers literature-supported molecular regions more accurately than existing alternatives while producing cross-drug interaction scores that better reflect predictor behavior.
Generalist vision--language--action (VLA) policies learn long-horizon behavior mainly through short-horizon action prediction and reveal little beyond sampled commands. This creates two coupled bottlenecks: a single action target must implicitly absorb task progress, intermediate intent, and local reliability, while these control states remain hidden during execution. Inspired by functional principles of biological sensorimotor control, we introduce LM-X , which organizes prediction across task, event, and motor scales without claiming anatomical correspondence. Three explicitly supervised signals are emitted online and directly condition action generation: return-to-go (RTG) measures visible task progress, event-to-go (ETG) identifies the next semantic transition, and heteroscedastic action flow estimates local reliability through propagated variance. Explanation is therefore intrinsic to control rather than generated post hoc. Before a costly 20-day pretraining run on 64 NVIDIA B200 GPUs, a controlled five-task pretraining gate verifies the design: the complete model improves success by 16.0 points over the action-only backbone and by 10.8 points over the strongest single-head variant. We then train LM-X on more than 20,000 hours of real-robot trajectories, including over 1,000 hours of failed policy rollouts. LM-X achieves 74.1\% across 50 randomized-hard RoboTwin2.0 tasks versus 55.4\% for GR00T N1.7, and 68.6\% versus 50.7\% across seven real-robot tasks. RTG tracks semantic progress and visible regression, while variance rises during hesitation and oscillatory control. These results show that explicit multi-timescale predictive state can strengthen control while exposing interpretable internal estimates.
Explainability for transformer-based language models is becoming crucial as these systems are deployed in high-stakes applications. As a result, the ecosystem of explainability tools is rapidly evolving, becoming richer, but also more fragmented and harder to navigate. To address this challenge, we present Virgil, an interactive system that lets practitioners and researchers, including non-experts, navigate explainability tools for transformer language models. Supported by a curated knowledge base, the system enables users to discover and compare explainability tools within a unified interface.
Ranit Debnath Akash, Ashish Kumar, Gang Tan +1cs.SE cs.AI cs.LG
Data-driven software systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes socio-economic domains, from criminal justice to financial lending. However, these systems often exhibit individual discrimination---unjustified disparities in which a program yields different outcomes for similar individuals who differ only in their protected attributes (e.g., race, gender, age). While existing research has focused on detecting and quantifying these bugs, there remains a critical lack of principled mechanisms to explain and localize individual fairness bugs. Current explanation techniques are largely designed for single-input decisions rather than the relational nature of discrimination, which inherently involves a comparison between an original and a counterfactual pair. We present REMI, a framework for the automated localization, explanation, and mitigation of individual discrimination. Inspired by loop-invariant synthesis in formal methods, we treat counterfactual fairness as a relational invariant discovery problem. We introduce a bidirectional relational explanation framework that learns over paired examples $(x, x')$ to identify regions of the input space where fairness is violated. Unlike traditional one-way implication pairs used in invariant inference, our approach enforces bidirectional constraints: requiring identical outcomes for both original and counterfactual samples. REMI utilizes three data-alignment techniques to infer interpretable rule-based models that act as "fairness invariants." These rules serve as guardrails to selectively block or relabel unfair predictions without requiring model retraining. Our evaluation on symbolic and neural network programs demonstrates that REMI localizes ground-truth fairness bugs in over 83% of cases, significantly outperforming state-of-the-art baselines and reducing discriminatory decisions in black-box models by up to 70%.
Muyan Anna Li, Manikandan Ravikiran, Aditi Gautamcs.LG cs.AI stat.ML
Time series forecasting models are widely used in high-stakes settings, yet their predictions remain difficult to interpret because existing post-hoc methods often ignore temporal dependence and fail to provide horizon-specific explanations. We propose a model-agnostic explainability framework that explains forecasting predictions by attributing each forecast horizon to temporally relevant historical lags. The framework models forecasting as a latent trajectory and introduces semantic flow to quantify how information evolves across time in the model's internal representations. By aggregating semantic flow, it constructs a lag-horizon attribution matrix that captures horizon-resolved temporal influence. To improve explainability, we further generate structure-preserving perturbations and fit sparse local surrogate models, producing human-readable and temporally coherent explanations. We evaluate the method using faithfulness and stability diagnostics across multiple benchmark datasets. Results show that the semantic-flow variant achieves competitive or superior faithfulness compared to standard post-hoc baselines, while being substantially more computationally efficient. Stability analysis further demonstrates that the explanations are robust and identifies regimes where interpretation should be applied with caution.
Md Abdullah Al Kafi, Walayat Hussain, Mousumi Karmakar +2cs.CV
Automated malaria diagnosis from stained blood-smear microscopy is dominated by deep convolutional neural networks that are accurate but computationally expensive, poorly interpretable, and rarely validated with patient-level rigor. We present EMFE (Efficient Mathematical Feature Extraction), a five-feature framework for classifying single red-blood-cell images as parasitized or uninfected using Gray World color normalization, adaptive green-channel thresholding, morphological spot detection, and classical machine learning. Using the NIH LHNCBC malaria dataset (27,558 images from 200 patients), we evaluate Random Forest, Histogram Gradient Boosting, and Support Vector Machine classifiers under patient-grouped nested cross-validation (K_outer=20, K_inner=3), ensuring that cells from each patient remain within a single fold. The optimized Random Forest achieves 94.6% pooled out-of-fold accuracy (95% CI [93.6, 95.7]), corroborated by an untouched 40-patient holdout test (94.3%) and a patient-level permutation test (p<0.001, 1,000 permutations). Ablation experiments quantify the contribution of individual features and pipeline stages. Hardware-matched comparisons with retrained DenseNet121, ResNet50, and MobileNetV2 models assess the accuracy-efficiency trade-off. Synthetic perturbations characterize three failure modes, while explainability analysis identifies spot saturation as the dominant discriminative feature. Patient-level aggregation further quantifies sensitivity-specificity trade-offs and false-positive accumulation. These results demonstrate a statistically rigorous, interpretable, and computationally lightweight alternative to deep learning, while explicitly quantifying its limitations.