Mind the XAI Gap: A Human-Centered LLM Framework for Democratizing Explainable AI
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.12240v1
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 21:41:07 GMT
- Title: Mind the XAI Gap: A Human-Centered LLM Framework for Democratizing Explainable AI
- Authors: Eva Paraschou, Ioannis Arapakis, Sofia Yfantidou, Sebastian Macaluso, Athena Vakali,
- Abstract summary: We introduce a framework that ensures transparency and human-centered explanations tailored to the needs of experts and non-experts.<n>Our framework encapsulates in one response explanations understandable by non-experts and technical information to experts.
- Score: 3.301842921686179
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly embedded in critical decision-making systems, however their foundational ``black-box'' models require eXplainable AI (XAI) solutions to enhance transparency, which are mostly oriented to experts, making no sense to non-experts. Alarming evidence about AI's unprecedented human values risks brings forward the imperative need for transparent human-centered XAI solutions. In this work, we introduce a domain-, model-, explanation-agnostic, generalizable and reproducible framework that ensures both transparency and human-centered explanations tailored to the needs of both experts and non-experts. The framework leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) and employs in-context learning to convey domain- and explainability-relevant contextual knowledge into LLMs. Through its structured prompt and system setting, our framework encapsulates in one response explanations understandable by non-experts and technical information to experts, all grounded in domain and explainability principles. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework, we establish a ground-truth contextual ``thesaurus'' through a rigorous benchmarking with over 40 data, model, and XAI combinations for an explainable clustering analysis of a well-being scenario. Through a comprehensive quality and human-friendliness evaluation of our framework's explanations, we prove high content quality through strong correlations with ground-truth explanations (Spearman rank correlation=0.92) and improved interpretability and human-friendliness to non-experts through a user study (N=56). Our overall evaluation confirms trust in LLMs as HCXAI enablers, as our framework bridges the above Gaps by delivering (i) high-quality technical explanations aligned with foundational XAI methods and (ii) clear, efficient, and interpretable human-centered explanations for non-experts.
Related papers
- Unifying VXAI: A Systematic Review and Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AI [4.715895520943978]
Explainable AI (XAI) addresses this issue by providing human-understandable explanations of model behavior.<n>Despite the growing number of XAI methods, the field lacks standardized evaluation protocols and consensus on appropriate metrics.<n>We introduce a unified framework for the eValuation of XAI (VXAI)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-18T12:25:37Z) - Explainability in Context: A Multilevel Framework Aligning AI Explanations with Stakeholder with LLMs [11.11196150521188]
This paper addresses how trust in AI is influenced by the design and delivery of explanations.<n>The framework consists of three layers: algorithmic and domain-based, human-centered, and social explainability.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-06T08:54:41Z) - When Models Know More Than They Can Explain: Quantifying Knowledge Transfer in Human-AI Collaboration [79.69935257008467]
We introduce Knowledge Integration and Transfer Evaluation (KITE), a conceptual and experimental framework for Human-AI knowledge transfer capabilities.<n>We conduct the first large-scale human study (N=118) explicitly designed to measure it.<n>In our two-phase setup, humans first ideate with an AI on problem-solving strategies, then independently implement solutions, isolating model explanations' influence on human understanding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-05T20:48:16Z) - Making Sense of the Unsensible: Reflection, Survey, and Challenges for XAI in Large Language Models Toward Human-Centered AI [11.454716478837014]
Explainable AI (XAI) acts as a crucial interface between the opaque reasoning of large language models (LLMs) and diverse stakeholders.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive reflection and survey of XAI for LLMs, framed around three guiding questions: Why is explainability essential? What technical and ethical dimensions does it entail?<n>We argue that explainability must evolve into a civic infrastructure fostering trust, enabling contestability, and aligning AI systems with institutional accountability and human-centered decision-making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-18T17:30:10Z) - A Multi-Layered Research Framework for Human-Centered AI: Defining the Path to Explainability and Trust [2.4578723416255754]
Human-Centered AI (HCAI) emphasizes alignment with human values, while Explainable AI (XAI) enhances transparency by making AI decisions more understandable.<n>This paper presents a novel three-layered framework that bridges HCAI and XAI to establish a structured explainability paradigm.<n>Our findings advance Human-Centered Explainable AI (HCXAI), fostering AI systems that are transparent, adaptable, and ethically aligned.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-14T01:29:30Z) - MoRE-LLM: Mixture of Rule Experts Guided by a Large Language Model [54.14155564592936]
We propose a Mixture of Rule Experts guided by a Large Language Model (MoRE-LLM)<n>MoRE-LLM steers the discovery of local rule-based surrogates during training and their utilization for the classification task.<n>LLM is responsible for enhancing the domain knowledge alignment of the rules by correcting and contextualizing them.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-26T11:09:21Z) - Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI): from inherent explainability to large language models [0.0]
Explainable AI (XAI) techniques facilitate the explainability or interpretability of machine learning models.<n>This paper details the advancements of explainable AI methods, from inherently interpretable models to modern approaches.<n>We review explainable AI techniques that leverage vision-language model (VLM) frameworks to automate or improve the explainability of other machine learning models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-17T06:16:57Z) - A Unified Framework for Evaluating the Effectiveness and Enhancing the Transparency of Explainable AI Methods in Real-World Applications [2.0681376988193843]
"Black box" characteristic of AI models constrains interpretability, transparency, and reliability.<n>This study presents a unified XAI evaluation framework to evaluate correctness, interpretability, robustness, fairness, and completeness of explanations generated by AI models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-05T05:30:10Z) - GIVE: Structured Reasoning of Large Language Models with Knowledge Graph Inspired Veracity Extrapolation [108.2008975785364]
Graph Inspired Veracity Extrapolation (GIVE) is a novel reasoning method that merges parametric and non-parametric memories to improve accurate reasoning with minimal external input.<n>GIVE guides the LLM agent to select the most pertinent expert data (observe), engage in query-specific divergent thinking (reflect), and then synthesize this information to produce the final output (speak)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-11T03:05:06Z) - Principle-Driven Self-Alignment of Language Models from Scratch with
Minimal Human Supervision [84.31474052176343]
Recent AI-assistant agents, such as ChatGPT, rely on supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with human annotations and reinforcement learning from human feedback to align the output with human intentions.
This dependence can significantly constrain the true potential of AI-assistant agents due to the high cost of obtaining human supervision.
We propose a novel approach called SELF-ALIGN, which combines principle-driven reasoning and the generative power of LLMs for the self-alignment of AI agents with minimal human supervision.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-04T17:59:28Z) - Towards Human Cognition Level-based Experiment Design for Counterfactual
Explanations (XAI) [68.8204255655161]
The emphasis of XAI research appears to have turned to a more pragmatic explanation approach for better understanding.
An extensive area where cognitive science research may substantially influence XAI advancements is evaluating user knowledge and feedback.
We propose a framework to experiment with generating and evaluating the explanations on the grounds of different cognitive levels of understanding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-31T19:20:22Z) - Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome.
Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations.
We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z) - Explainability in Deep Reinforcement Learning [68.8204255655161]
We review recent works in the direction to attain Explainable Reinforcement Learning (XRL)
In critical situations where it is essential to justify and explain the agent's behaviour, better explainability and interpretability of RL models could help gain scientific insight on the inner workings of what is still considered a black box.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-08-15T10:11:42Z)
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.