# Clash of the Explainers: Argumentation for Context-Appropriate Explanations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.07635 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.07635/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 18 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Dec 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10045/) (2019)
- [Datasheets for Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.09010/) (2018)
- [Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.07269/) (2017)
- [Model Cards for Model Reporting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.03993/) (2018)
- [A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.01933/) (2018)
- [Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07697/) (2019)
- [Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02508/) (2019)
- [AutoML: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.00709/) (2019)
- [One Explanation Does Not Fit All: A Toolkit and Taxonomy of AI Explainability Techniques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.03012/) (2019)
- [The role of explainability in creating trustworthy artificial intelligence for health care: a comprehensive survey of the terminology, design choices, and evaluation strategies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.15911/) (2020)
- [Human-centered Explainable AI: Towards a Reflective Sociotechnical Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.01092/) (2020)
- [Rethinking Explainability as a Dialogue: A Practitioner's Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.01875/) (2022)
- [Machine Learning Explainability for External Stakeholders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.05408/) (2020)
- [Why Should I Choose You? AutoXAI: A Framework for Selecting and Tuning eXplainable AI Solutions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.02795/) (2022)
- [Contestable Black Boxes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.05133/) (2020)
- [Abduction and Argumentation for Explainable Machine Learning: A Position Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.12896/) (2020)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Understanding when and why to apply any given eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) technique is not a straightforward task. There is no single approach that is best suited for a given context. This paper aims to address the challenge of selecting the most appropriate explainer given the context in which an explanation is required. For AI explainability to be effective, explanations and how they are presented needs to be oriented towards the stakeholder receiving the explanation. If -- in general -- no single explanation technique surpasses the rest, then reasoning over the available methods is required in order to select one that is context-appropriate. Due to the transparency they afford, we propose employing argumentation techniques to reach an agreement over the most suitable explainers from a given set of possible explainers. In this paper, we propose a modular reasoning system consisting of a given mental model of the relevant stakeholder, a reasoner component that solves the argumentation problem generated by a multi-explainer component, and an AI model that is to be explained suitably to the stakeholder of interest. By formalising supporting premises -- and inferences -- we can map stakeholder characteristics to those of explanation techniques. This allows us to reason over the techniques and prioritise the best one for the given context, while also offering transparency into the selection decision.