mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Investigating the Duality of Interpretability and Explainability in Machine Learning

arXiv 2503.21356 ↗First posted 27 Mar 2025cs.LG cs.AIcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid evolution of machine learning (ML) has led to the widespread adoption of complex "black box" models, such as deep neural networks and ensemble methods. These models exhibit exceptional predictive performance, making them invaluable for critical decision-making across diverse domains within society. However, their inherently opaque nature raises concerns about transparency and interpretability, making them untrustworthy decision support systems. To alleviate such a barrier to high-stakes adoption, research community focus has been on developing methods to explain black box models as a means to address the challenges they pose. Efforts are focused on explaining these models instead of developing ones that are inherently interpretable. Designing inherently interpretable models from the outset, however, can pave the path towards responsible and beneficial applications in the field of ML. In this position paper, we clarify the chasm between explaining black boxes and adopting inherently interpretable models. We emphasize the imperative need for model interpretability and, following the purpose of attaining better (i.e., more effective or efficient w.r.t. predictive performance) and trustworthy predictors, provide an experimental evaluation of latest hybrid learning methods that integrates symbolic knowledge into neural network predictors. We demonstrate how interpretable hybrid models could potentially supplant black box ones in different domains.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2025.

Builds on

10 of 26 references.

References · 10

  1. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
  2. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
  3. 2018Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 508
  4. 2019The many Shapley values for model explanationcited by 344
  5. 2018Metrics for Explainable AI: Challenges and Prospectscited by 260
  6. 2020On the Tractability of SHAP Explanationscited by 92
  7. 2021Counterfactuals and Causability in Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Theory, Algorithms, and Applicationscited by 59
  8. 2023Adversarial attacks and defenses in explainable artificial intelligence: A surveycited by 48
  9. 2023A Review on Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Healthcare: Why, How, and When?cited by 24
  10. 2021Pitfalls of Explainable ML: An Industry Perspectivecited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 7; 2026: 1.

8 papers.