xai_evals : A Framework for Evaluating Post-Hoc Local Explanation Methods

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.03014v1
• Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2025 09:17:48 GMT
• Title: xai_evals : A Framework for Evaluating Post-Hoc Local Explanation Methods
• Abstract summary: xai_evals provides a framework for generating, benchmarking, and evaluating explanation methods.<n>It integrates popular techniques like SHAP, LIME, Grad-CAM, Integrated Gradients (IG), and Backtrace.<n>xai_evals enhances the interpretability of machine learning models, fostering transparency and trust in AI systems.
• Score: 1.747623282473278
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The growing complexity of machine learning and deep learning models has led to an increased reliance on opaque "black box" systems, making it difficult to understand the rationale behind predictions. This lack of transparency is particularly challenging in high-stakes applications where interpretability is as important as accuracy. Post-hoc explanation methods are commonly used to interpret these models, but they are seldom rigorously evaluated, raising concerns about their reliability. The Python package xai_evals addresses this by providing a comprehensive framework for generating, benchmarking, and evaluating explanation methods across both tabular and image data modalities. It integrates popular techniques like SHAP, LIME, Grad-CAM, Integrated Gradients (IG), and Backtrace, while supporting evaluation metrics such as faithfulness, sensitivity, and robustness. xai_evals enhances the interpretability of machine learning models, fostering transparency and trust in AI systems. The library is open-sourced at https://pypi.org/project/xai-evals/ .

Related papers

• A Self-Explainable Deep Architecture for Security Applications [19.98791465260198]
  We introduce XSec, a self-explainable deep architecture developed for security applications.<n>During training, XSec uses a novel mask-based approach to extract informative sub-features from the data.<n>XSec then leverages the prototypes in a dedicated similarity layer at test time to compute similarity scores and generates interpretable explanations without the need for post-hoc analysis.<n>We evaluate XSec across five diverse security scenarios, demonstrating its ability to achieve an average classification accuracy of 97.33% with minimal performance compromise.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-06T03:08:13Z)
• Focus When Necessary: Adaptive Routing and Collaborative Grounding for Training-Free Visual Grounding [56.38477453373368]
  LazyMCoT is a dynamic and training-free framework that adaptively allocates visual grounding efforts based on sample difficulty.<n>LazyMCoT rivals training-based approaches by simultaneously improving reasoning accuracy and reducing average inference latency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T03:17:44Z)
• Learn to Rank: Visual Attribution by Learning Importance Ranking [58.69028273772474]
  We propose a new approach to generate visual attribution maps for computer vision models.<n>Our method produces dense, pixel-level attributions in a single forward pass with optional, few-step gradient refinement.<n>Our experiments demonstrate consistent quantitative improvements and sharper, boundary-aligned explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-07T12:53:22Z)
• UNBOX: Unveiling Black-box visual models with Natural-language [50.433977345786055]
  We introduce UNBOX, a framework for class-wise model dissection under fully data-free, gradient-free, and backpropagation-free constraints.<n>We evaluate UNBOX on ImageNet-1K, Waterbirds, and CelebA through semantic fidelity tests, visual-feature correlation analyses, and slice-discovery auditing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T17:16:39Z)
• Continuous Visual Autoregressive Generation via Score Maximization [69.67438563485887]
  We introduce a Continuous VAR framework that enables direct visual autoregressive generation without vector quantization.<n>Within this framework, all we need is to select a strictly proper score and set it as the training objective to optimize.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-12T17:58:14Z)
• Thinking Longer, Not Larger: Enhancing Software Engineering Agents via Scaling Test-Time Compute [61.00662702026523]
  We propose a unified Test-Time Compute scaling framework that leverages increased inference-time instead of larger models. Our framework incorporates two complementary strategies: internal TTC and external TTC. We demonstrate our textbf32B model achieves a 46% issue resolution rate, surpassing significantly larger models such as DeepSeek R1 671B and OpenAI o1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-31T07:31:32Z)
• No Regrets: Investigating and Improving Regret Approximations for Curriculum Discovery [53.08822154199948]
  Unsupervised Environment Design (UED) methods have gained recent attention as their adaptive curricula promise to enable agents to be robust to in- and out-of-distribution tasks. This work investigates how existing UED methods select training environments, focusing on task prioritisation metrics. We develop a method that directly trains on scenarios with high learnability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-27T14:31:54Z)
• CHILLI: A data context-aware perturbation method for XAI [3.587367153279351]
  The trustworthiness of Machine Learning (ML) models can be difficult to assess, but is critical in high-risk or ethically sensitive applications. We propose a novel framework, CHILLI, for incorporating data context into XAI by generating contextually aware perturbations. This is shown to improve both the soundness and accuracy of the explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-10T10:18:07Z)
• Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations [53.15438489398938]
  Large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, but their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode. We propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T16:35:30Z)
• Preserving Knowledge Invariance: Rethinking Robustness Evaluation of Open Information Extraction [50.62245481416744]
  We present the first benchmark that simulates the evaluation of open information extraction models in the real world. We design and annotate a large-scale testbed in which each example is a knowledge-invariant clique. By further elaborating the robustness metric, a model is judged to be robust if its performance is consistently accurate on the overall cliques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T12:05:09Z)
• What and How of Machine Learning Transparency: Building Bespoke Explainability Tools with Interoperable Algorithmic Components [77.87794937143511]
  This paper introduces a collection of hands-on training materials for explaining data-driven predictive models. These resources cover the three core building blocks of this technique: interpretable representation composition, data sampling and explanation generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-08T13:33:25Z)
• Incremental Online Learning Algorithms Comparison for Gesture and Visual Smart Sensors [68.8204255655161]
  This paper compares four state-of-the-art algorithms in two real applications: gesture recognition based on accelerometer data and image classification. Our results confirm these systems' reliability and the feasibility of deploying them in tiny-memory MCUs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-01T17:05:20Z)
• Explainable AI via Learning to Optimize [2.8010955192967852]
  Indecipherable black boxes are common in machine learning (ML), but applications increasingly require explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) This work provides concrete tools for XAI in situations where prior knowledge must be encoded and untrustworthy inferences flagged.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-29T15:57:03Z)
• Inducing Gaussian Process Networks [80.40892394020797]
  We propose inducing Gaussian process networks (IGN), a simple framework for simultaneously learning the feature space as well as the inducing points. The inducing points, in particular, are learned directly in the feature space, enabling a seamless representation of complex structured domains. We report on experimental results for real-world data sets showing that IGNs provide significant advances over state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-21T05:27:09Z)
• Interpretable pipelines with evolutionarily optimized modules for RL tasks with visual inputs [5.254093731341154]
  We propose end-to-end pipelines composed of multiple interpretable models co-optimized by means of evolutionary algorithms. We test our approach in reinforcement learning environments from the Atari benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-10T10:33:44Z)
• SOLIS -- The MLOps journey from data acquisition to actionable insights [62.997667081978825]
  In this paper we present a unified deployment pipeline and freedom-to-operate approach that supports all requirements while using basic cross-platform tensor framework and script language engines. This approach however does not supply the needed procedures and pipelines for the actual deployment of machine learning capabilities in real production grade systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-22T14:45:37Z)
• A Practical Tutorial on Explainable AI Techniques [5.671062637797752]
  This tutorial is meant to be the go-to handbook for any audience with a computer science background. It aims at getting intuitive insights of machine learning models, accompanied with straight, fast, and intuitive explanations out of the box.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-13T17:47:31Z)
• Rational Shapley Values [0.0]
  Most popular tools for post-hoc explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) are either insensitive to context or difficult to summarize. I introduce emphrational Shapley values, a novel XAI method that synthesizes and extends these seemingly incompatible approaches. I leverage tools from decision theory and causal modeling to formalize and implement a pragmatic approach that resolves a number of known challenges in XAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-18T15:45:21Z)
• Developing a Fidelity Evaluation Approach for Interpretable Machine Learning [2.2448567386846916]
  Explainable AI (XAI) methods are used to improve the interpretability of complex models. In particular, methods to evaluate the fidelity of the explanation to the underlying black box require further development. Our evaluations suggest that the internal mechanism of the underlying predictive model, the internal mechanism of the explainable method used and model and data complexity all affect explanation fidelity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-16T00:21:16Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.