From latent factors to language: a user study on LLM-generated explanations for an inherently interpretable matrix-based recommender system

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.18980v2
• Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2025 07:49:58 GMT
• Title: From latent factors to language: a user study on LLM-generated explanations for an inherently interpretable matrix-based recommender system
• Authors: Maxime Manderlier, Fabian Lecron, Olivier Vu Thanh, Nicolas Gillis,
• Abstract summary: We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can generate effective, user-facing explanations from a mathematically interpretable recommendation model.<n>We conduct a study with 326 participants who assessed the quality of the explanations across five key dimensions.<n>Our analysis reveals that all explanation types are generally well received, with moderate statistical differences between strategies.
• Score: 8.280161440212504
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can generate effective, user-facing explanations from a mathematically interpretable recommendation model. The model is based on constrained matrix factorization, where user types are explicitly represented and predicted item scores share the same scale as observed ratings, making the model's internal representations and predicted scores directly interpretable. This structure is translated into natural language explanations using carefully designed LLM prompts. Many works in explainable AI rely on automatic evaluation metrics, which often fail to capture users' actual needs and perceptions. In contrast, we adopt a user-centered approach: we conduct a study with 326 participants who assessed the quality of the explanations across five key dimensions-transparency, effectiveness, persuasion, trust, and satisfaction-as well as the recommendations themselves. To evaluate how different explanation strategies are perceived, we generate multiple explanation types from the same underlying model, varying the input information provided to the LLM. Our analysis reveals that all explanation types are generally well received, with moderate statistical differences between strategies. User comments further underscore how participants react to each type of explanation, offering complementary insights beyond the quantitative results.

Related papers

• Do LLM Self-Explanations Help Users Predict Model Behavior? Evaluating Counterfactual Simulatability with Pragmatic Perturbations [1.8772057593980798]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can produce verbalized self-explanations.<n>We evaluate how well humans and LLM judges can predict a model's answers to counterfactual follow-up questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-07T10:13:26Z)
• Hierarchical Interaction Summarization and Contrastive Prompting for Explainable Recommendations [9.082885521130617]
  We propose a novel approach combining profile generation via hierarchical interaction summarization (PGHIS) with contrastive prompting for explanation generation (CPEG)<n>Our approach outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods, achieving a great improvement on metrics about explainability (e.g., 5% on GPTScore) and text quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-08T14:45:47Z)
• Evaluating Human Alignment and Model Faithfulness of LLM Rationale [66.75309523854476]
  We study how well large language models (LLMs) explain their generations through rationales. We show that prompting-based methods are less "faithful" than attribution-based explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-28T20:06:30Z)
• Understanding Large Language Model Behaviors through Interactive Counterfactual Generation and Analysis [22.755345889167934]
  We present an interactive visualization system that enables exploration of large language models (LLMs) through counterfactual analysis.<n>Our system features a novel algorithm that generates fluent and semantically meaningful counterfactuals.<n>A user study with LLM practitioners and interviews with experts demonstrate the system's usability and effectiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T19:57:03Z)
• Learning to Generate Explainable Stock Predictions using Self-Reflective Large Language Models [54.21695754082441]
  We propose a framework to teach Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate explainable stock predictions. A reflective agent learns how to explain past stock movements through self-reasoning, while the PPO trainer trains the model to generate the most likely explanations. Our framework can outperform both traditional deep-learning and LLM methods in prediction accuracy and Matthews correlation coefficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T03:18:58Z)
• RecExplainer: Aligning Large Language Models for Explaining Recommendation Models [50.74181089742969]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable intelligence in understanding, reasoning, and instruction following. This paper presents the initial exploration of using LLMs as surrogate models to explain black-box recommender models. To facilitate an effective alignment, we introduce three methods: behavior alignment, intention alignment, and hybrid alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T03:05:43Z)
• Explainability for Large Language Models: A Survey [59.67574757137078]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in natural language processing. This paper introduces a taxonomy of explainability techniques and provides a structured overview of methods for explaining Transformer-based language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T22:14:26Z)
• Evaluating and Explaining Large Language Models for Code Using Syntactic Structures [74.93762031957883]
  This paper introduces ASTxplainer, an explainability method specific to Large Language Models for code. At its core, ASTxplainer provides an automated method for aligning token predictions with AST nodes. We perform an empirical evaluation on 12 popular LLMs for code using a curated dataset of the most popular GitHub projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-07T18:50:57Z)
• Counterfactuals of Counterfactuals: a back-translation-inspired approach to analyse counterfactual editors [3.4253416336476246]
  We focus on the analysis of counterfactual, contrastive explanations. We propose a new back translation-inspired evaluation methodology. We show that by iteratively feeding the counterfactual to the explainer we can obtain valuable insights into the behaviour of both the predictor and the explainer models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T16:04:28Z)
• A Mechanistic Interpretation of Arithmetic Reasoning in Language Models using Causal Mediation Analysis [128.0532113800092]
  We present a mechanistic interpretation of Transformer-based LMs on arithmetic questions. This provides insights into how information related to arithmetic is processed by LMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T11:43:47Z)
• MaNtLE: Model-agnostic Natural Language Explainer [9.43206883360088]
  We introduce MaNtLE, a model-agnostic natural language explainer that analyzes multiple classifier predictions. MaNtLE uses multi-task training on thousands of synthetic classification tasks to generate faithful explanations. Simulated user studies indicate that, on average, MaNtLE-generated explanations are at least 11% more faithful compared to LIME and Anchors explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T12:58:06Z)

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.