REVIEW 1 cited by
Which LIME should I trust? Concepts, Challenges, and Solutions
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 neural networks become dominant in essential systems, Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) plays a crucial role in fostering trust and detecting potential misbehavior of opaque models. LIME (Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations) is among the most prominent model-agnostic approaches, generating explanations by approximating the behavior of black-box models around specific instances. Despite its popularity, LIME faces challenges related to fidelity, stability, and applicability to domain-specific problems. Numerous adaptations and enhancements have been proposed to address these issues, but the growing number of developments can be overwhelming, complicating efforts to navigate LIME-related research. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first survey to comprehensively explore and collect LIME's foundational concepts and known limitations. We categorize and compare its various enhancements, offering a structured taxonomy based on intermediate steps and key issues. Our analysis provides a holistic overview of advancements in LIME, guiding future research and helping practitioners identify suitable approaches. Additionally, we provide a continuously updated interactive website (https://patrick-knab.github.io/which-lime-to-trust/), offering a concise and accessible overview of the survey.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
ConceptSMILE: Auditing the Trustworthiness of Concept-Based Explainable AI
A perturbation-and-surrogate audit shows MedSAM and VLM retinal concept explanations have pathway- and concept-specific reliability, not automatic trustworthiness.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.