mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Reasons, Values, Stakeholders: A Philosophical Framework for Explainable Artificial Intelligence

arXiv 2103.00752 ↗First posted 1 Mar 2021cs.CY cs.AIcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The societal and ethical implications of the use of opaque artificial intelligence systems for consequential decisions, such as welfare allocation and criminal justice, have generated a lively debate among multiple stakeholder groups, including computer scientists, ethicists, social scientists, policy makers, and end users. However, the lack of a common language or a multi-dimensional framework to appropriately bridge the technical, epistemic, and normative aspects of this debate prevents the discussion from being as productive as it could be. Drawing on the philosophical literature on the nature and value of explanations, this paper offers a multi-faceted framework that brings more conceptual precision to the present debate by (1) identifying the types of explanations that are most pertinent to artificial intelligence predictions, (2) recognizing the relevance and importance of social and ethical values for the evaluation of these explanations, and (3) demonstrating the importance of these explanations for incorporating a diversified approach to improving the design of truthful algorithmic ecosystems. The proposed philosophical framework thus lays the groundwork for establishing a pertinent connection between the technical and ethical aspects of artificial intelligence systems.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 93 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Mar 2021.

Builds on

21 of 93 references.

References · 21

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  3. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  4. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  5. 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,309
  6. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,201
  7. 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
  8. 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 970
  9. 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 716
  10. 2017Dynamic Routing Between Capsulescited by 689
  11. 2020Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Makingcited by 281
  12. 2017Real Time Image Saliency for Black Box Classifierscited by 246
9 more
  1. 2017Deep Learning for Case-Based Reasoning through Prototypes: A Neural Network that Explains Its Predictionscited by 234
  2. 2016Model-Agnostic Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 219
  3. 2015Interpretable classifiers using rules and Bayesian analysis: Building a better stroke prediction modelcited by 140
  4. 2018Explaining Explanations in AIcited by 136
  5. 2018'It's Reducing a Human Being to a Percentage'; Perceptions of Justice in Algorithmic Decisionscited by 91
  6. 2019Stacked Capsule Autoencoderscited by 82
  7. 2015The Bayesian Case Model: A Generative Approach for Case-Based Reasoning and Prototype Classificationcited by 76
  8. 2017Fairer and more accurate, but for whom?cited by 13
  9. 2016Making Tree Ensembles Interpretablecited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 4.

10 papers.