mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Deceptive AI Explanations: Creation and Detection

arXiv 2001.07641 ↗First posted 21 Jan 2020cs.LG cs.AI stat.MLcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Artificial intelligence (AI) comes with great opportunities but can also pose significant risks. Automatically generated explanations for decisions can increase transparency and foster trust, especially for systems based on automated predictions by AI models. However, given, e.g., economic incentives to create dishonest AI, to what extent can we trust explanations? To address this issue, our work investigates how AI models (i.e., deep learning, and existing instruments to increase transparency regarding AI decisions) can be used to create and detect deceptive explanations. As an empirical evaluation, we focus on text classification and alter the explanations generated by GradCAM, a well-established explanation technique in neural networks. Then, we evaluate the effect of deceptive explanations on users in an experiment with 200 participants. Our findings confirm that deceptive explanations can indeed fool humans. However, one can deploy machine learning (ML) methods to detect seemingly minor deception attempts with accuracy exceeding 80% given sufficient domain knowledge. Without domain knowledge, one can still infer inconsistencies in the explanations in an unsupervised manner, given basic knowledge of the predictive model under scrutiny.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 21 Jan 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 4; 2023: 5; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area: