跳到主要內容
AI News HubLIVE
來源內容 · 翻譯待補全2 分鐘閱讀

待翻譯:Faithfulness Without Anchors: A Position Paper on the Structural Misalignments of Explainable AI Faithfulness Metrics for Feature Importance

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:2610.12493v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) tools have often been presented as methods to increase trust in machine learning models by making aspects of their algorithms more human-understandable. However, evidence accumulated over the last decade points to an overall failure of this objective, instead promoting overreliance on incorrect predictions, which can subsequently lead to algorithmic aversion. Rather, XAI appears to function primarily as a debugging tool, useful for obtaining anecdotal insights into, for example, features learned by the model. One of the main issues underlying this limitation is that XAI methods often oversimplify the inner workings of the model, resulting in misalignment between the explan…

來源arXiv AI作者: Marco Zullich, Emily Schiller, Ivan Gentile, David Dembinsky, Adriano Lucieri, Kilian G\"oller, Steffen Seitz
待翻譯:Faithfulness Without Anchors: A Position Paper on the Structural Misalignments of Explainable AI Faithfulness Metrics for Feature Importance
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:Faithfulness Without Anchors: A Position Paper on the Structural Misalignments of Explainable AI Faithfulness Metrics for Feature Importance View a PDF of the paper titled Faithfulness Without Anchors: A Position Paper on the Structural Misalignments of Explainable AI Faithfulness Metrics for Feature Importance, by Marco Zullich and 6 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) tools have often been presented as methods to increase trust in machine learning models by making aspects of their algorithms more human-understandable. However, evidence accumulated over the last decade points to an overall failure of this objective, instead promoting overreliance on incorrect predictions, which can subsequently lead to algorithmic aversion. Rather, XAI appears to function primarily as a debugging tool, useful for obtaining anecdotal insights into, for example, features learned by the model. One of the main issues underlying this limitation is that XAI methods often oversimplify the inner workings of the model, resulting in misalignment between the explanation and the model itself - a behavior referred to as unfaithfulness or infidelity. Faithfulness can be interpreted as the degree of approximation between an explanation and the model. Computing faithfulness in a rigorous manner would thus make it possible to quantify one of the various elements of trustworthiness of an explanation. However, existing metrics present significant limitations, making this quantification either infeasible or computationally expensive. In this position paper, we outline five major shortcomings of current faithfulness metrics and propose four possible avenues for research to bolster their reliability. Comments: Presented at the IJCAI-ECAI 2026 Workshop on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Machine Learning (stat.ML) Cite as: arXiv:2610.12493 [cs.AI] (or arXiv:2610.12493v1 [cs.AI] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.12493 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite Submission history From: Marco Zullich [view email] [v1] Thu, 24 Sep 2026 15:29:40 UTC (111 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Faithfulness Without Anchors: A Position Paper on the Structural Misalignments of Explainable AI Faithfulness Metrics for Feature Importance, by Marco Zullich and 6 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Additional Features Audio Summary Current browse context: cs.AI new | recent | 2026-10 Change to browse by: cs cs.LG stat stat.ML 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

研究者進階

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:2610.12493v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) tools have often been presented as methods to increase trust in machine learning models b…

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。