Search Results for author:
Found 6 papers, 3 papers with code
Explainable AI needs formal notions of explanation correctness
This will lead to notions of explanation correctness that can be theoretically verified and objective metrics of explanation performance that can be assessed using ground-truth data.
GECOBench: A Gender-Controlled Text Dataset and Benchmark for Quantifying Biases in Explanations
This gives rise to ground-truth 'world explanations' for gender classification tasks, enabling the objective evaluation of the correctness of XAI methods.
EXACT: Towards a platform for empirically benchmarking Machine Learning model explanation methods
The evolving landscape of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims to improve the interpretability of intricate machine learning (ML) models, yet faces challenges in formalisation and empirical validation, being an inherently unsupervised process.
XAI-TRIS: Non-linear image benchmarks to quantify false positive post-hoc attribution of feature importance
The field of 'explainable' artificial intelligence (XAI) has produced highly cited methods that seek to make the decisions of complex machine learning (ML) methods 'understandable' to humans, for example by attributing 'importance' scores to input features.
Benchmark data to study the influence of pre-training on explanation performance in MR image classification
Here, we propose a benchmark dataset that allows for quantifying explanation performance in a realistic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) classification task.
Explainable artificial intelligence
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
+2
Theoretical Behavior of XAI Methods in the Presence of Suppressor Variables
In recent years, the community of 'explainable artificial intelligence' (XAI) has created a vast body of methods to bridge a perceived gap between model 'complexity' and 'interpretability'.
