mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Explainable Machine Learning for Public Policy: Use Cases, Gaps, and Research Directions

arXiv 2010.14374 ↗First posted 27 Oct 2020cs.LG cs.AIcited by 17

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Explainability is highly-desired in Machine Learning (ML) systems supporting high-stakes policy decisions in areas such as health, criminal justice, education, and employment. While the field of explainable ML has expanded in recent years, much of this work has not taken real-world needs into account. A majority of proposed methods are designed with textitgeneric explainability goals without well-defined use-cases or intended end-users and evaluated on simplified tasks, benchmark problems/datasets, or with proxy users (e.g., AMT). We argue that these simplified evaluation settings do not capture the nuances and complexities of real-world applications. As a result, the applicability and effectiveness of this large body of theoretical and methodological work in real-world applications are unclear. In this work, we take steps toward addressing this gap for the domain of public policy. First, we identify the primary use-cases of explainable ML within public policy problems. For each use case, we define the end-users of explanations and the specific goals the explanations have to fulfill. Finally, we map existing work in explainable ML to these use-cases, identify gaps in established capabilities, and propose research directions to fill those gaps to have a practical societal impact through ML. The contribution is 1) a methodology for explainable ML researchers to identify use cases and develop methods targeted at them and 2) using that methodology for the domain of public policy and giving an example for the researchers on developing explainable ML methods that result in real-world impact.

Key facts. Cited by 17 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 27 Oct 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 5; 2023: 3; 2024: 3; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

17 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2021How can I choose an explainer? An Application-grounded Evaluation of Post-hoc Explanationscited by 58
  2. 2024Most Influential Subset Selection: Challenges, Promises, and Beyondcited by 31
  3. 2024Fairness in Algorithmic Recourse Through the Lens of Substantive Equality of Opportunitycited by 9
  4. 2025Probabilistic Stability Guarantees for Feature Attributionscited by 9
  5. 2022Think About the Stakeholders First! Towards an Algorithmic Transparency Playbook for Regulatory Compliancecited by 7
  6. 2021Desiderata for Explainable AI in statistical production systems of the European Central Bankcited by 5
  7. 2022Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Precepts, Methods, and Opportunities for Research in Constructioncited by 4
  8. 2023A Case Study on Designing Evaluations of ML Explanations with Simulated User Studiescited by 1
  9. 2024Need of AI in Modern Education: in the Eyes of Explainable AI (xAI)cited by 1
  10. 2025GeoReg: Weight-Constrained Few-Shot Regression for Socio-Economic Estimation using LLMcited by 1
  11. 2022One-way Explainability Isn't The Messagecited by 0
  12. 2022On the Importance of Application-Grounded Experimental Design for Evaluating Explainable ML Methodscited by 0
5 more
  1. 2022Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Construction: The Content, Context, Process, Outcome Evaluation Frameworkcited by 0
  2. 2023Five policy uses of algorithmic transparency and explainabilitycited by 0
  3. 2023Beyond XAI:Obstacles Towards Responsible AIcited by 0
  4. 2025How to Achieve Higher Accuracy with Less Training Points?cited by 0
  5. 2026Crowd-Sourced Geographies of Income: Using Google Maps Points of Interest as High-Frequency Proxies for Sub-Municipal Income Estimation in Sao Paulo, Brazilcited by 0