Onto-Epistemological Analysis of AI Explanations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.02996v1
• Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2025 13:36:57 GMT
• Title: Onto-Epistemological Analysis of AI Explanations
• Authors: Martina Mattioli, Eike Petersen, Aasa Feragen, Marcello Pelillo, Siavash A. Bigdeli,
• Abstract summary: We discuss explainable AI (XAI) methods that provide explanations of the models' decision process.<n>We show how seemingly small technical changes to an XAI method may correspond to important differences in the underlying assumptions about explanations.<n>We also highlight the risks of ignoring the underlying onto-epistemological paradigm when choosing an XAI method for a given application.
• Score: 8.570570532582446
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is being applied in almost every field. At the same time, the currently dominant deep learning methods are fundamentally black-box systems that lack explanations for their inferences, significantly limiting their trustworthiness and adoption. Explainable AI (XAI) methods aim to overcome this challenge by providing explanations of the models' decision process. Such methods are often proposed and developed by engineers and scientists with a predominantly technical background and incorporate their assumptions about the existence, validity, and explanatory utility of different conceivable explanatory mechanisms. However, the basic concept of an explanation -- what it is, whether we can know it, whether it is absolute or relative -- is far from trivial and has been the subject of deep philosophical debate for millennia. As we point out here, the assumptions incorporated into different XAI methods are not harmless and have important consequences for the validity and interpretation of AI explanations in different domains. We investigate ontological and epistemological assumptions in explainability methods when they are applied to AI systems, meaning the assumptions we make about the existence of explanations and our ability to gain knowledge about those explanations. Our analysis shows how seemingly small technical changes to an XAI method may correspond to important differences in the underlying assumptions about explanations. We furthermore highlight the risks of ignoring the underlying onto-epistemological paradigm when choosing an XAI method for a given application, and we discuss how to select and adapt appropriate XAI methods for different domains of application.

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)
• Emergent, not Immanent: A Baradian Reading of Explainable AI [37.51348424835944]
  We argue that interpretations emerge from situated entanglements of the AI model with humans, context, and the interpretative apparatus.<n>We propose design directions for XAI interfaces that support emergent interpretation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-21T14:32:40Z)
• 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 Mechanistic Explanatory Strategy for XAI [0.0]
  This paper outlines a mechanistic strategy for explaining the functional organization of deep learning systems.<n>The findings suggest that pursuing mechanistic explanations can uncover elements that traditional explainability techniques may overlook.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-02T18:30:32Z)
• Opening the Black-Box: A Systematic Review on Explainable AI in Remote Sensing [51.524108608250074]
  Black-box machine learning approaches have become a dominant modeling paradigm for knowledge extraction in remote sensing. We perform a systematic review to identify the key trends in the field and shed light on novel explainable AI approaches. We also give a detailed outlook on the challenges and promising research directions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T13:19:58Z)
• Categorical Foundations of Explainable AI: A Unifying Theory [8.637435154170916]
  This paper presents the first mathematically rigorous definitions of key XAI notions and processes, using the well-funded formalism of Category theory. We show that our categorical framework allows to: (i) model existing learning schemes and architectures, (ii) formally define the term "explanation", (iii) establish a theoretical basis for XAI, and (iv) analyze commonly overlooked aspects of explaining methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-27T11:10:16Z)
• 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)
• Alterfactual Explanations -- The Relevance of Irrelevance for Explaining AI Systems [0.9542023122304099]
  We argue that in order to fully understand a decision, not only knowledge about relevant features is needed, but that the awareness of irrelevant information also highly contributes to the creation of a user's mental model of an AI system. Our approach, which we call Alterfactual Explanations, is based on showing an alternative reality where irrelevant features of an AI's input are altered. We show that alterfactual explanations are suited to convey an understanding of different aspects of the AI's reasoning than established counterfactual explanation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-19T16:20:37Z)
• The Who in XAI: How AI Background Shapes Perceptions of AI Explanations [61.49776160925216]
  We conduct a mixed-methods study of how two different groups--people with and without AI background--perceive different types of AI explanations. We find that (1) both groups showed unwarranted faith in numbers for different reasons and (2) each group found value in different explanations beyond their intended design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-28T17:32:04Z)
• 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)
• Argumentative XAI: A Survey [15.294433619347082]
  We overview XAI approaches built using methods from the field of computational argumentation. We focus on different types of explanation (intrinsic and post-hoc), different models with which argumentation-based explanations are deployed, different forms of delivery, and different argumentation frameworks they use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-24T13:32:59Z)
• Neuro-symbolic Architectures for Context Understanding [59.899606495602406]
  We propose the use of hybrid AI methodology as a framework for combining the strengths of data-driven and knowledge-driven approaches. Specifically, we inherit the concept of neuro-symbolism as a way of using knowledge-bases to guide the learning progress of deep neural networks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-09T15:04:07Z)
• A general framework for scientifically inspired explanations in AI [76.48625630211943]
  We instantiate the concept of structure of scientific explanation as the theoretical underpinning for a general framework in which explanations for AI systems can be implemented. This framework aims to provide the tools to build a "mental-model" of any AI system so that the interaction with the user can provide information on demand and be closer to the nature of human-made explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-02T10:32:21Z)

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.