mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Use-Case-Grounded Simulations for Explanation Evaluation

arXiv 2206.02256 ↗First posted 5 Jun 2022cs.HC cs.AI cs.LGcited by 19

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A growing body of research runs human subject evaluations to study whether providing users with explanations of machine learning models can help them with practical real-world use cases. However, running user studies is challenging and costly, and consequently each study typically only evaluates a limited number of different settings, e.g., studies often only evaluate a few arbitrarily selected explanation methods. To address these challenges and aid user study design, we introduce Use-Case-Grounded Simulated Evaluations (SimEvals). SimEvals involve training algorithmic agents that take as input the information content (such as model explanations) that would be presented to each participant in a human subject study, to predict answers to the use case of interest. The algorithmic agent's test set accuracy provides a measure of the predictiveness of the information content for the downstream use case. We run a comprehensive evaluation on three real-world use cases (forward simulation, model debugging, and counterfactual reasoning) to demonstrate that Simevals can effectively identify which explanation methods will help humans for each use case. These results provide evidence that SimEvals can be used to efficiently screen an important set of user study design decisions, e.g. selecting which explanations should be presented to the user, before running a potentially costly user study.

Key facts. Cited by 19 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jun 2022.

Builds on

33 of 47 references.

References · 33

  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. 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,714
  4. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  5. 2017Deep Setscited by 1,394
  6. 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
  7. 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
  8. 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
  9. 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 612
  10. 2018Towards Robust Interpretability with Self-Explaining Neural Networkscited by 505
  11. 2017Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragilecited by 443
  12. 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 327
21 more
  1. 2018Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretabilitycited by 256
  2. 2020Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventionscited by 250
  3. 2019InterpretML: A Unified Framework for Machine Learning Interpretabilitycited by 243
  4. 2020Problems with Shapley-value-based explanations as feature importance measurescited by 198
  5. 2020Evaluating Explainable AI: Which Algorithmic Explanations Help Users Predict Model Behavior?cited by 189
  6. 2018Representer Point Selection for Explaining Deep Neural Networkscited by 187
  7. 2020Debugging Tests for Model Explanationscited by 146
  8. 2020Proxy Tasks and Subjective Measures Can Be Misleading in Evaluating Explainable AI Systemscited by 138
  9. 2019The Hidden Assumptions Behind Counterfactual Explanations and Principal Reasonscited by 115
  10. 2020Evaluating Explanations: How much do explanations from the teacher aid students?cited by 94
  11. 2018Model Agnostic Supervised Local Explanationscited by 83
  12. 2019An Evaluation of the Human-Interpretability of Explanationcited by 71
  13. 2021How can I choose an explainer? An Application-grounded Evaluation of Post-hoc Explanationscited by 58
  14. 2018What can AI do for me: Evaluating Machine Learning Interpretations in Cooperative Playcited by 52
  15. 2022Rethinking Stability for Attribution-based Explanationscited by 52
  16. 2018Do Explanations make VQA Models more Predictable to a Human?cited by 51
  17. 2019Regularizing Black-box Models for Improved Interpretabilitycited by 35
  18. 2020Remembering for the Right Reasons: Explanations Reduce Catastrophic Forgettingcited by 33
  19. 2021Sanity Simulations for Saliency Methodscited by 15
  20. 2020Measure Utility, Gain Trust: Practical Advice for XAI Researchercited by 9
  21. 2018Improving Recommender Systems Beyond the Algorithmcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 9; 2024: 6; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

19 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2023Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey designcited by 176
  2. 2022OpenXAI: Towards a Transparent Evaluation of Model Explanationscited by 125
  3. 2022Towards Human-centered Explainable AI: A Survey of User Studies for Model Explanationscited by 84
  4. 2023Rethinking Model Evaluation as Narrowing the Socio-Technical Gapcited by 56
  5. 2023Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-Text Rationalescited by 37
  6. 2024A Decision Theoretic Framework for Measuring AI Reliancecited by 26
  7. 2024Interpretable LLM-based Table Question Answeringcited by 18
  8. 2023ALMANACS: A Simulatability Benchmark for Language Model Explainabilitycited by 11
  9. 2023Sample based Explanations via Generalized Representerscited by 10
  10. 2024Utilizing Human Behavior Modeling to Manipulate Explanations in AI-Assisted Decision Making: The Good, the Bad, and the Scarycited by 9
  11. 2023BEDD: The MineRL BASALT Evaluation and Demonstrations Dataset for Training and Benchmarking Agents that Solve Fuzzy Taskscited by 8
  12. 2023Evaluating the Utility of Model Explanations for Model Developmentcited by 3
7 more
  1. 2024OpenHEXAI: An Open-Source Framework for Human-Centered Evaluation of Explainable Machine Learningcited by 2
  2. 2024A Sim2Real Approach for Identifying Task-Relevant Properties in Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 2
  3. 2023A Case Study on Designing Evaluations of ML Explanations with Simulated User Studiescited by 1
  4. 2023Is Task-Agnostic Explainable AI a Myth?cited by 1
  5. 2025Explanations are a Means to an End: Decision Theoretic Explanation Evaluationcited by 1
  6. 2024Towards a Research Community in Interpretable Reinforcement Learning: the InterpPol Workshopcited by 0
  7. 2026Rules or Weights? Comparing User Understanding of Explainable AI Techniques with the Cognitive XAI-Adaptive Modelcited by 0