Published June 30, 2023 | Version v1
Journal article Open

Demystifying AI: A Comprehensive Review of Explainable AI Techniques and Applications

Authors/Creators

Description

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) seeks to make AI systems more transparent and understandable to users. This review examines the various techniques developed to achieve explainability in AI models and their applications across different domains. We discuss methods such as feature attribution, model simplification, and example-based explanations, highlighting their strengths and limitations. Additionally, we explore the importance of XAI in critical fields like healthcare, finance, and law. The findings underscore the necessity of explainability for trust, accountability, and ethical AI deployment, pointing towards future directions in the field.

Files

EJAET-10-6-49-52.pdf

Files (265.1 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:c523eb3d6ef532f2cdc4f4ac82d8da18
265.1 kB Preview Download

Additional details

References

  • [1]. Ribeiro, M. T., Singh, S., & Guestrin, C. (2016). "Why should I trust you?": Explaining the predictions of any classifier. *Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining*.
  • [2]. Lundberg, S. M., & Lee, S. I. (2017). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. *Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems*.
  • [3]. Sundararajan, M., Taly, A., & Yan, Q. (2017). Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. *Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning*.
  • [4]. Quinlan, J. R. (1986). Induction of decision trees. *Machine Learning, 1*(1), 81-106.
  • [5]. Lakkaraju, H., Bach, S. H., & Leskovec, J. (2016). Interpretable decision sets: A joint framework for description and prediction. *Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining*.
  • [6]. Craven, M. W., & Shavlik, J. W. (1996). Extracting tree-structured representations of trained networks. *Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems*.
  • [7]. Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Russell, C. (2017). Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. *Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 31*(2), 841-887.
  • [8]. Kim, B., Rudin, C., & Shah, J. A. (2014). The Bayesian case model: A generative approach for case-based reasoning and prototype classification. *Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems*.
  • [9]. Kolodner, J. L. (1992). An introduction to case-based reasoning. *Artificial Intelligence Review, 6*(1), 3-34.
  • [10]. Tonekaboni, S., Joshi, S., mccradden, M. D., & Goldenberg, A. (2019). What clinicians want: Contextualizing explainable machine learning for clinical end use. *Proceedings of the Machine Learning for Healthcare Conference*.
  • [11]. Adler, P., Falk, C., Friedler, S. A., Nix, T., Rybeck, G., Scheidegger, C., ... & Venkatasubramanian, S. (2018). Auditing black-box models for indirect influence. *Knowledge and Information Systems, 54*(1), 95-122.
  • [12]. Aletras, N., Tsarapatsanis, D., Preoţiuc-Pietro, D., & Lampos, V. (2016). Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: A natural language processing perspective. *peerj Computer Science, 2*, e93.
  • [13]. Barocas, S., Hardt, M., & Narayanan, A. (2019). Fairness and machine learning. *fairmlbook.org*.
  • [14]. Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Floridi, L. (2017). Why a right to explanation of automated decision-making does not exist in the General Data Protection Regulation. *International Data Privacy Law, 7*(2), 76-99.