Explainable Human Activity Recognition: A Unified Review of Concepts and Mechanisms

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.09799v1
• Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 18:20:47 GMT
• Title: Explainable Human Activity Recognition: A Unified Review of Concepts and Mechanisms
• Abstract summary: Human activity recognition (HAR) has become a key component of intelligent systems for healthcare monitoring, assistive living, smart environments, and human-computer interaction.<n>Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) has emerged as a critical direction for making HAR systems more transparent and human-centered.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive review of explainable HAR methods across wearable, ambient, physiological, and multimodal sensing settings.
• Score: 2.9396318146965332
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Human activity recognition (HAR) has become a key component of intelligent systems for healthcare monitoring, assistive living, smart environments, and human-computer interaction. Although deep learning has substantially improved HAR performance on multivariate sensor data, the resulting models often remain opaque, limiting trust, reliability, and real-world deployment. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) has therefore emerged as a critical direction for making HAR systems more transparent and human-centered. This paper presents a comprehensive review of explainable HAR methods across wearable, ambient, physiological, and multimodal sensing settings. We introduce a unified perspective that separates conceptual dimensions of explainability from algorithmic explanation mechanisms, reducing ambiguities in prior surveys. Building on this distinction, we present a mechanism-centric taxonomy of XAI-HAR methods covering major explanation paradigms. The review examines how these methods address the temporal, multimodal, and semantic complexities of HAR, and summarize their interpretability objectives, explanation targets, and limitations. In addition, we discuss current evaluation practices, highlight key challenges in achieving reliable and deployable XAI-HAR, and outline directions toward trustworthy activity recognition systems that better support human understanding and decision-making.

Related papers

• Are Concept Bottleneck Models Effective as Decision-Support Systems? [48.16053753967562]
  Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) are interpretable-by-design neural networks that detect human-understandable concepts from the input and use them to generate predictions.<n>We present two user studies evaluating how concept-based explanations and user interventions on the model's concepts affect the performance of the human-AI team.<n>Our results show that CBMs can improve human-AI team accuracy relative to both unaided human performance and performance with non-interpretable AI support.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-26T09:42:44Z)
• A Survey of Reasoning in Autonomous Driving Systems: Open Challenges and Emerging Paradigms [49.66022971508878]
  We argue that reasoning should be elevated from a modular component to the system's cognitive core.<n>We derive and systematize seven core reasoning challenges, such as the responsiveness-reasoning trade-off and social-game reasoning.<n>We identify a fundamental and unresolved tension between the high-latency, deliberative nature of LLM-based reasoning and the millisecond-scale, safety-critical demands of vehicle control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T07:40:53Z)
• How Far are VLMs from Visual Spatial Intelligence? A Benchmark-Driven Perspective [103.44502230776352]
  We present a systematic investigation of Visual Spatial Reasoning (VSR) in Vision-Language Models (VLMs)<n>We categorize spatial intelligence into three levels of capability, ie, basic perception, spatial understanding, spatial planning, and curate SIBench, a spatial intelligence benchmark encompassing nearly 20 open-source datasets across 23 task settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-23T12:00:14Z)
• Interpretability as Alignment: Making Internal Understanding a Design Principle [3.6704226968275253]
  Interpretability provides a route to internal transparency by revealing the computations that drive outputs.<n>We argue that interpretability especially mechanistic approaches should be treated as a design principle for alignment, not an auxiliary diagnostic tool.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T13:45:59Z)
• Interpretable Concept-based Deep Learning Framework for Multimodal Human Behavior Modeling [5.954573238057435]
  EU General Data Protection Regulation requires any high-risk AI systems to be sufficiently interpretable.<n>Existing explainable methods often compromise between interpretability and performance.<n>We propose a novel and generalizable framework, namely the Attention-Guided Concept Model (AGCM)<n>AGCM provides learnable conceptual explanations by identifying what concepts that lead to the predictions and where they are observed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-14T13:15:21Z)
• Explainable Interface for Human-Autonomy Teaming: A Survey [12.26178592621411]
  This paper conducts a thoughtful study on the underexplored domain of Explainable Interface (EI) in HAT systems. We explore the design, development, and evaluation of EI within XAI-enhanced HAT systems. We contribute to a novel framework for EI, addressing the unique challenges in HAT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-04T06:35:38Z)
• Mechanistic Interpretability for AI Safety -- A Review [28.427951836334188]
  This review explores mechanistic interpretability. Mechanistic interpretability could help prevent catastrophic outcomes as AI systems become more powerful and inscrutable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T11:01:51Z)
• Helpful, Misleading or Confusing: How Humans Perceive Fundamental Building Blocks of Artificial Intelligence Explanations [11.667611038005552]
  We take a step back from sophisticated predictive algorithms and look into explainability of simple decision-making models. We aim to assess how people perceive comprehensibility of their different representations. This allows us to capture how diverse stakeholders judge intelligibility of fundamental concepts that more elaborate artificial intelligence explanations are built from.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-02T03:15:35Z)
• 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)
• Interpreting Neural Policies with Disentangled Tree Representations [58.769048492254555]
  We study interpretability of compact neural policies through the lens of disentangled representation. We leverage decision trees to obtain factors of variation for disentanglement in robot learning. We introduce interpretability metrics that measure disentanglement of learned neural dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-13T01:10:41Z)
• 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)
• 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.