Don't Explain without Verifying Veracity: An Evaluation of Explainable AI with Video Activity Recognition
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Explainable machine learning and artificial intelligence models have been used to justify a model's decision-making process. This added transparency aims to help improve user performance and understanding of the underlying model. However, in practice, explainable systems face many open questions and challenges. Specifically, designers might reduce the complexity of deep learning models in order to provide interpretability. The explanations generated by these simplified models, however, might not accurately justify and be truthful to the model. This can further add confusion to the users as they might not find the explanations meaningful with respect to the model predictions. Understanding how these explanations affect user behavior is an ongoing challenge. In this paper, we explore how explanation veracity affects user performance and agreement in intelligent systems. Through a controlled user study with an explainable activity recognition system, we compare variations in explanation veracity for a video review and querying task. The results suggest that low veracity explanations significantly decrease user performance and agreement compared to both accurate explanations and a system without explanations. These findings demonstrate the importance of accurate and understandable explanations and caution that poor explanations can sometimes be worse than no explanations with respect to their effect on user performance and reliance on an AI system.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 5 May 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2020: 1; 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 3; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
11 papers.
- 2020Soliciting Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback for Interactive Machine Learning Reduces User Trust and Impressions of Model Accuracycited by 19
- 2021Explainable Activity Recognition for Smart Home Systemscited by 14
- 2024TV-TREES: Multimodal Entailment Trees for Neuro-Symbolic Video Reasoningcited by 12
- 2023Why is plausibility surprisingly problematic as an XAI criterion?cited by 9
- 2025Improving Human Verification of LLM Reasoning through Interactive Explanation Interfacescited by 7
- 2023Non-contact Multimodal Indoor Human Monitoring Systems: A Surveycited by 2
- 2024STAA: Spatio-Temporal Attention Attribution for Real-Time Interpreting Transformer-based Video Modelscited by 2
- 2022Temporal Relevance Analysis for Video Action Modelscited by 1
- 2023A Survey of the Various Methodologies Towards making Artificial Intelligence More Explainablecited by 0
- 2026"Trust Junk" Leads to Unjustified Support for Highly Discriminatory Predictive Modelscited by 0
- 2026Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback Affects Perceived Accuracy and Trust, but Task Subjectivity Matterscited by 0
- 2026Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback Affects Perceived Accuracy and Trust, but Task Subjectivity Matters20 Jul 2026
- 2026"Trust Junk" Leads to Unjustified Support for Highly Discriminatory Predictive Models14 Jul 2026
- 2025Improving Human Verification of LLM Reasoning through Interactive Explanation Interfaces27 Oct 2025
- 2024STAA: Spatio-Temporal Attention Attribution for Real-Time Interpreting Transformer-based Video Models1 Nov 2024
- 2024TV-TREES: Multimodal Entailment Trees for Neuro-Symbolic Video Reasoning29 Feb 2024
- 2023Non-contact Multimodal Indoor Human Monitoring Systems: A Survey11 Dec 2023
- 2023A Survey of the Various Methodologies Towards making Artificial Intelligence More Explainable4 Nov 2023
- 2023Why is plausibility surprisingly problematic as an XAI criterion?30 Mar 2023
- 2022Temporal Relevance Analysis for Video Action Models25 Apr 2022
- 2021Explainable Activity Recognition for Smart Home Systems20 May 2021
- 2020Soliciting Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback for Interactive Machine Learning Reduces User Trust and Impressions of Model Accuracy28 Aug 2020