User-centric evaluation of explainability of AI with and for humans: a comprehensive empirical study
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This study is located in the Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HCAI) and focuses on the results of a user-centered assessment of commonly used eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) algorithms, specifically investigating how humans understand and interact with the explanations provided by these algorithms. To achieve this, we employed a multi-disciplinary approach that included state-of-the-art research methods from social sciences to measure the comprehensibility of explanations generated by a state-of-the-art lachine learning model, specifically the Gradient Boosting Classifier (XGBClassifier). We conducted an extensive empirical user study involving interviews with 39 participants from three different groups, each with varying expertise in data science, data visualization, and domain-specific knowledge related to the dataset used for training the machine learning model. Participants were asked a series of questions to assess their understanding of the model's explanations. To ensure replicability, we built the model using a publicly available dataset from the UC Irvine Machine Learning Repository, focusing on edible and non-edible mushrooms. Our findings reveal limitations in existing XAI methods and confirm the need for new design principles and evaluation techniques that address the specific information needs and user perspectives of different classes of AI stakeholders. We believe that the results of our research and the cross-disciplinary methodology we developed can be successfully adapted to various data types and user profiles, thus promoting dialogue and address opportunities in HCAI research. To support this, we are making the data resulting from our study publicly available.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Oct 2024.
Builds on
8 of 33 references.
References · 8
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,206
- 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 614
- 2023Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) 2.0: A Manifesto of Open Challenges and Interdisciplinary Research Directionscited by 125
- 2020General Pitfalls of Model-Agnostic Interpretation Methods for Machine Learning Modelscited by 75
- 2021Explainability Pitfalls: Beyond Dark Patterns in Explainable AIcited by 36
- 2020The Grammar of Interactive Explanatory Model Analysiscited by 24
- 2021Pitfalls of Explainable ML: An Industry Perspectivecited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2025Human Guided Learning of Transparent Regression Modelscited by 0
- 2025Decoding the Multimodal Maze: A Systematic Review on the Adoption of Explainability in Multimodal Attention-based Modelscited by 0
- 2025Actionable and diverse counterfactual explanations incorporating domain knowledge and plausibility constraintscited by 0
- 2026Position: We Need Practical AI Alignment Methods to Mirror Human Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026Position: We Need Practical AI Alignment Methods to Mirror Human Reasoning20 Jul 2026
- 2025Actionable and diverse counterfactual explanations incorporating domain knowledge and plausibility constraints25 Nov 2025
- 2025Decoding the Multimodal Maze: A Systematic Review on the Adoption of Explainability in Multimodal Attention-based Models6 Aug 2025
- 2025Human Guided Learning of Transparent Regression Models21 Feb 2025