REVIEW 8 cited by
One Explanation Does Not Fit All: A Toolkit and Taxonomy of AI Explainability Techniques
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
As artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms make further inroads into society, calls are increasing from multiple stakeholders for these algorithms to explain their outputs. At the same time, these stakeholders, whether they be affected citizens, government regulators, domain experts, or system developers, present different requirements for explanations. Toward addressing these needs, we introduce AI Explainability 360 (http://aix360.mybluemix.net/), an open-source software toolkit featuring eight diverse and state-of-the-art explainability methods and two evaluation metrics. Equally important, we provide a taxonomy to help entities requiring explanations to navigate the space of explanation methods, not only those in the toolkit but also in the broader literature on explainability. For data scientists and other users of the toolkit, we have implemented an extensible software architecture that organizes methods according to their place in the AI modeling pipeline. We also discuss enhancements to bring research innovations closer to consumers of explanations, ranging from simplified, more accessible versions of algorithms, to tutorials and an interactive web demo to introduce AI explainability to different audiences and application domains. Together, our toolkit and taxonomy can help identify gaps where more explainability methods are needed and provide a platform to incorporate them as they are developed.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
Your Model Is Unfair, Are You Even Aware? Inverse Relationship Between Comprehension and Trust in Explainability Visualizations of Biased ML Models
More comprehensible explainability visualizations increase perceived model bias and decrease trust, with bias perception mediating the negative comprehension-trust relationship.
-
RuleEdit: Failure-Guided Human-AI Model Editing with Prospective Impact Preview
Rule-guided mismatch cues raise Human+AI rehab-assessment accuracy by 14% and cut harmful reliance; prospective embedding previews raise local model-edit gains from 11.5% to 36%, with global transfer often regressing.
-
Evaluating Actionability in Explainable AI
From 14 interviews in medicine and education, the authors derive a catalog mapping 12 information categories to 60 user actions across three action dimensions.
-
MetaExplainer: A Framework to Generate Multi-Type User-Centered Explanations for AI Systems
A neuro-symbolic pipeline decomposes user questions, delegates to model explainers, and synthesizes natural-language explanations, achieving moderate stage-wise scores on a diabetes dataset.
-
Towards Uncertainty Aware Task Delegation and Human-AI Collaborative Decision-Making
Distance-based uncertainty visualizations with interactive examples improved correct decisions by 8.20 percentage points over numeric confidence scores in a 27-participant stroke rehabilitation study.
-
Position: Explainability Research Must Prioritize Foundations over Ad-hoc Methods
Explainable AI research should prioritize definitions, properties, evaluations, and actionability over new ad-hoc methods, on evidence from 617 papers and 34 practitioners.
-
XAI and Statistical Analysis for Reliable Intrusion Detection in the UAVIDS-2025 Dataset: From Tree to Hybrid and Tabular DNN Ensembles
XGBoost with SHAP and statistical distribution analysis on UAVIDS-2025 identifies density support intersection as the cause of false predictions for Wormhole and Blackhole attacks in UAV intrusion detection.
-
Human-Centered Explainability in Interactive Information Systems: A Survey
A systematic review of 100 empirical user studies synthesizes explainability research into five conceptual dimensions, a design classification, and six measurement categories.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.