Survey for Categorising Explainable AI Studies Using Data Analysis Task Frameworks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.10208v1
• Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 12:26:45 GMT
• Title: Survey for Categorising Explainable AI Studies Using Data Analysis Task Frameworks
• Authors: Hamzah Ziadeh, Hendrik Knoche,
• Abstract summary: We propose a method for categorising and comparing XAI studies under three dimensions: what, why, and who.<n>We identify the main problems as: inadequate descriptions of tasks, context-free studies, and insufficient testing with target users.<n>We propose study guidelines for designing and reporting XAI tasks to improve the XAI community's ability to parse the rapidly growing field.
• Score: 1.8087157239832476
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Research into explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) for data analysis tasks suffer from a large number of contradictions and lack of concrete design recommendations stemming from gaps in understanding the tasks that require AI assistance. In this paper, we drew on multiple fields such as visual analytics, cognition, and dashboard design to propose a method for categorising and comparing XAI studies under three dimensions: what, why, and who. We identified the main problems as: inadequate descriptions of tasks, context-free studies, and insufficient testing with target users. We propose that studies should specifically report on their users' domain, AI, and data analysis expertise to illustrate the generalisability of their findings. We also propose study guidelines for designing and reporting XAI tasks to improve the XAI community's ability to parse the rapidly growing field. We hope that our contribution can help researchers and designers better identify which studies are most relevant to their work, what gaps exist in the research, and how to handle contradictory results regarding XAI design.

Related papers

• User-centric evaluation of explainability of AI with and for humans: a comprehensive empirical study [5.775094401949666]
  This study is located in the Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HCAI) It focuses on the results of a user-centered assessment of commonly used eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T12:32:39Z)
• Data Analysis in the Era of Generative AI [56.44807642944589]
  This paper explores the potential of AI-powered tools to reshape data analysis, focusing on design considerations and challenges. We explore how the emergence of large language and multimodal models offers new opportunities to enhance various stages of data analysis workflow. We then examine human-centered design principles that facilitate intuitive interactions, build user trust, and streamline the AI-assisted analysis workflow across multiple apps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-27T06:31:03Z)
• Indexing Analytics to Instances: How Integrating a Dashboard can Support Design Education [14.45375751032367]
  We develop a research artifact integrating a design analytics dashboard with design instances, and the design environment that students use to create them. We develop research implications addressing how AI-based design analytics can support instructors' assessment and feedback experiences in situated course contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-08T11:33:58Z)
• How Human-Centered Explainable AI Interface Are Designed and Evaluated: A Systematic Survey [48.97104365617498]
  The emerging area of em Explainable Interfaces (EIs) focuses on the user interface and user experience design aspects of XAI. This paper presents a systematic survey of 53 publications to identify current trends in human-XAI interaction and promising directions for EI design and development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T15:44:56Z)
• Explainable Authorship Identification in Cultural Heritage Applications: Analysis of a New Perspective [48.031678295495574]
  We explore the applicability of existing general-purpose eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques to AId. In particular, we assess the relative merits of three different types of XAI techniques on three different AId tasks. Our analysis shows that, while these techniques make important first steps towards explainable Authorship Identification, more work remains to be done.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T20:51:15Z)
• PyRCA: A Library for Metric-based Root Cause Analysis [66.72542200701807]
  PyRCA is an open-source machine learning library of Root Cause Analysis (RCA) for Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations (AIOps) It provides a holistic framework to uncover the complicated metric causal dependencies and automatically locate root causes of incidents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-20T09:55:10Z)
• Impact Of Explainable AI On Cognitive Load: Insights From An Empirical Study [0.0]
  This study measures cognitive load, task performance, and task time for implementation-independent XAI explanation types using a COVID-19 use case. We found that these explanation types strongly influence end-users' cognitive load, task performance, and task time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-18T09:52:09Z)
• 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)
• Towards Human-centered Explainable AI: A Survey of User Studies for Model Explanations [18.971689499890363]
  We identify and analyze 97core papers with human-based XAI evaluations over the past five years. Our research shows that XAI is spreading more rapidly in certain application domains, such as recommender systems. We propose practical guidelines on designing and conducting user studies for XAI researchers and practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-20T20:53:00Z)
• 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)
• Should We Trust (X)AI? Design Dimensions for Structured Experimental Evaluations [19.68184991543289]
  This paper systematically derives design dimensions for the structured evaluation of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) approaches. They enable a descriptive characterization, facilitating comparisons between different study designs. They further structure the design space of XAI, converging towards a precise terminology required for a rigorous study of XAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-14T13:40:51Z)

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.