跳到主要內容
AI News HubLIVE
站內改寫2 分鐘閱讀

待翻譯:A Synthetic Ground-Truth Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AI Methods

文章摘要

AI 服務暫時不可用,以下為來源摘要,待恢復後補全翻譯:arXiv:2609.30397v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods is a challenging task due to the lack of reliable evaluation procedures and, in particular, the absence of ground truth explanations. In the literature, existing evaluation approaches typically assess explanations by measuring their fidelity with respect to the predictions of a black-box model. However, such evaluation strategies only quantify the degree to which an explanation reproduces the model's output, without ensuring that the explanation correctly reflects the underlying decision process. As a consequence, different explanations may achieve similar fidelity scores while providing inconsistent or misleading interpretations of the model behavior. I…

來源arXiv AI作者: Miquel Mir\'o-Nicolau, Francesco Spinnato, Riccardo Guidotti
待翻譯:A Synthetic Ground-Truth Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AI Methods
報告錯誤

更正渠道尚未開通,可先複製下方文章資訊留存。

查看更正說明
直接讀正文

AI 服務暫時不可用,以下為來源正文,待恢復後補全翻譯。

[Submitted on 24 Sep 2026] Title:A Synthetic Ground-Truth Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AI Methods View a PDF of the paper titled A Synthetic Ground-Truth Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AI Methods, by Miquel Mir\'o-Nicolau and 2 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:Evaluating explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods is a challenging task due to the lack of reliable evaluation procedures and, in particular, the absence of ground truth explanations. In the literature, existing evaluation approaches typically assess explanations by measuring their fidelity with respect to the predictions of a black-box model. However, such evaluation strategies only quantify the degree to which an explanation reproduces the model's output, without ensuring that the explanation correctly reflects the underlying decision process. As a consequence, different explanations may achieve similar fidelity scores while providing inconsistent or misleading interpretations of the model behavior. In this paper, we propose a framework for the evaluation of XAI methods based on synthetic ground truth. The proposed approach relies on controlled interventions to generate synthetic datasets in which the importance of input components can be determined by design. This enables the construction of ground truth explanations that are directly aligned with the behavior of the model under analysis. The framework is instantiated across three data domains, namely binary images, tabular data, and time series, allowing a comprehensive assessment of explanation methods in heterogeneous settings. Experimental results obtained by evaluating nine widely used XAI methods show significant limitations in current techniques and highlight the importance of synthetic, intervention-based benchmarks for a reliable assessment of explanation quality. Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2609.30397 [cs.AI] (or arXiv:2609.30397v1 [cs.AI] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.30397 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) Submission history From: Miquel Miró-Nicolau [view email] [v1] Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:04:03 UTC (975 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled A Synthetic Ground-Truth Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AI Methods, by Miquel Mir\'o-Nicolau and 2 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.AI new | recent | 2026-09 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Loading... Data provided by: Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

展開要點與分析

文章情報

投資人進階

要點

  • AI 服務暫時不可用,系統已先保留來源內容與降級元數據。
  • arXiv:2609.30397v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods is a challenging task due to the lack of reliable evaluation procedure…

要點與分析由自動化流程生成,可能有誤,請結合原始來源核實。