From Questions to Insights: Exploring XAI Challenges Reported on Stack Overflow Questions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.03085v2
• Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 23:05:40 GMT
• Title: From Questions to Insights: Exploring XAI Challenges Reported on Stack Overflow Questions
• Authors: Saumendu Roy, Saikat Mondal, Banani Roy, Chanchal Roy,
• Abstract summary: Lack of interpretability is a major barrier that limits the practical usage of AI models.<n>XAI techniques (e.g., SHAP, LIME) have been employed to interpret these models' performance.<n>We conducted an exploratory study to expose these challenges, their severity, and features that can make XAI techniques more accessible.
• Score: 1.8049331600471712
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The lack of interpretability is a major barrier that limits the practical usage of AI models. Several eXplainable AI (XAI) techniques (e.g., SHAP, LIME) have been employed to interpret these models' performance. However, users often face challenges when leveraging these techniques in real-world scenarios and thus submit questions in technical Q&A forums like Stack Overflow (SO) to resolve these challenges. We conducted an exploratory study to expose these challenges, their severity, and features that can make XAI techniques more accessible and easier to use. Our contributions to this study are fourfold. First, we manually analyzed 663 SO questions that discussed challenges related to XAI techniques. Our careful investigation produced a catalog of seven challenges (e.g., disagreement issues). We then analyzed their prevalence and found that model integration and disagreement issues emerged as the most prevalent challenges. Second, we attempt to estimate the severity of each XAI challenge by determining the correlation between challenge types and answer metadata (e.g., the presence of accepted answers). Our analysis suggests that model integration issues is the most severe challenge. Third, we attempt to perceive the severity of these challenges based on practitioners' ability to use XAI techniques effectively in their work. Practitioners' responses suggest that disagreement issues most severely affect the use of XAI techniques. Fourth, we seek agreement from practitioners on improvements or features that could make XAI techniques more accessible and user-friendly. The majority of them suggest consistency in explanations and simplified integration. Our study findings might (a) help to enhance the accessibility and usability of XAI and (b) act as the initial benchmark that can inspire future research.

Related papers

• Beyond Explainable AI (XAI): An Overdue Paradigm Shift and Post-XAI Research Directions [95.59915390053588]
  This study focuses on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approaches-focusing on deep neural networks (DNNs) and large language models (LLMs)<n>We discuss critical symptoms that stem from deeper root causes (i.e., two paradoxes, two conceptual confusions, and five false assumptions)<n>To move beyond XAI's limitations, we propose a four-pronged paradigm shift toward reliable and certified AI development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T16:58:27Z)
• ATLAS: A High-Difficulty, Multidisciplinary Benchmark for Frontier Scientific Reasoning [118.46980291324148]
  ATLAS is a large-scale, high-difficulty, and cross-disciplinary evaluation suite composed of approximately 800 original problems.<n>Its key features include: High Originality and Contamination Resistance, with all questions newly created or substantially adapted to prevent test data leakage.<n>Preliminary results on leading models demonstrate ATLAS's effectiveness in differentiating their advanced scientific reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-18T11:13:06Z)
• More Questions than Answers? Lessons from Integrating Explainable AI into a Cyber-AI Tool [1.5711133309434766]
  We describe a preliminary case study on the use of XAI for source code classification. We find that the outputs of state-of-the-art saliency explanation techniques are lost in translation when interpreted by people with little AI expertise. We outline unaddressed gaps in practical and effective XAI, then touch on how emerging technologies like Large Language Models (LLMs) could mitigate these existing obstacles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T20:09:31Z)
• Solving for X and Beyond: Can Large Language Models Solve Complex Math Problems with More-Than-Two Unknowns? [57.80779199039929]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in solving math problems. This paper introduces a novel benchmark, BeyondX, designed to address these limitations by incorporating problems with multiple unknowns. Empirical study on BeyondX reveals that the performance of existing LLMs, even those fine-tuned specifically on math tasks, significantly decreases as the number of unknowns increases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-06T17:01:04Z)
• OlympicArena: Benchmarking Multi-discipline Cognitive Reasoning for Superintelligent AI [73.75520820608232]
  We introduce OlympicArena, which includes 11,163 bilingual problems across both text-only and interleaved text-image modalities.<n>These challenges encompass a wide range of disciplines spanning seven fields and 62 international Olympic competitions, rigorously examined for data leakage.<n>Our evaluations reveal that even advanced models like GPT-4o only achieve a 39.97% overall accuracy, illustrating current AI limitations in complex reasoning and multimodal integration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T16:20:53Z)
• Easy-to-Hard Generalization: Scalable Alignment Beyond Human Supervision [98.97575836717931]
  Current AI alignment methodologies rely on human-provided demonstrations or judgments.<n>This raises a challenging research question: How can we keep improving the systems when their capabilities have surpassed the levels of humans?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-14T15:12:38Z)
• Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) 2.0: A Manifesto of Open Challenges and Interdisciplinary Research Directions [37.640819269544934]
  Explainable AI (XAI) has emerged as a field of research with practical and ethical benefits across various domains. This paper highlights the advancements in XAI and its application in real-world scenarios. We present a manifesto of 27 open problems categorized into nine categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T17:44:55Z)
• Is Task-Agnostic Explainable AI a Myth? [0.0]
  Our work serves as a framework for unifying the challenges of contemporary explainable AI (XAI) We demonstrate that while XAI methods provide supplementary and potentially useful output for machine learning models, researchers and decision-makers should be mindful of their conceptual and technical limitations. We examine three XAI research avenues spanning image, textual, and graph data, covering saliency, attention, and graph-type explainers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-13T07:48:04Z)
• AI for IT Operations (AIOps) on Cloud Platforms: Reviews, Opportunities and Challenges [60.56413461109281]
  Artificial Intelligence for IT operations (AIOps) aims to combine the power of AI with the big data generated by IT Operations processes. We discuss in depth the key types of data emitted by IT Operations activities, the scale and challenges in analyzing them, and where they can be helpful. We categorize the key AIOps tasks as - incident detection, failure prediction, root cause analysis and automated actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-10T15:38:12Z)
• Transcending XAI Algorithm Boundaries through End-User-Inspired Design [27.864338632191608]
  Lacking explainability-focused functional support for end users may hinder the safe and responsible use of AI in high-stakes domains. Our work shows that grounding the technical problem in end users' use of XAI can inspire new research questions. Such end-user-inspired research questions have the potential to promote social good by democratizing AI and ensuring the responsible use of AI in critical domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-18T09:44:51Z)
• Connecting Algorithmic Research and Usage Contexts: A Perspective of Contextualized Evaluation for Explainable AI [65.44737844681256]
  A lack of consensus on how to evaluate explainable AI (XAI) hinders the advancement of the field. We argue that one way to close the gap is to develop evaluation methods that account for different user requirements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-22T05:17:33Z)
• Explainable AI (XAI): A Systematic Meta-Survey of Current Challenges and Future Opportunities [0.0]
  Explainable AI (XAI) has been proposed to make AI more transparent and thus advance the adoption of AI in critical domains. This study presents a systematic meta-survey for challenges and future research directions in XAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-11T19:06:13Z)
• A User-Centred Framework for Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Human-Robot Interaction [70.11080854486953]
  We propose a user-centred framework for XAI that focuses on its social-interactive aspect. The framework aims to provide a structure for interactive XAI solutions thought for non-expert users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-27T09:56:23Z)
• Technical Question Answering across Tasks and Domains [47.80330046038137]
  We present an adjustable joint learning approach for document retrieval and reading comprehension tasks. Our experiments on the TechQA demonstrates superior performance compared with state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-19T18:39:30Z)

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.