mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Uncertainty Propagation in XAI: A Comparison of Analytical and Empirical Estimators

arXiv 2504.03736 ↗First posted 1 Apr 2025cs.LG cs.AI cs.CVcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Understanding uncertainty in Explainable AI (XAI) is crucial for building trust and ensuring reliable decision-making in Machine Learning models. This paper introduces a unified framework for quantifying and interpreting Uncertainty in XAI by defining a general explanation function eθ(x, f) that captures the propagation of uncertainty from key sources: perturbations in input data and model parameters. By using both analytical and empirical estimates of explanation variance, we provide a systematic means of assessing the impact uncertainty on explanations. We illustrate the approach using a first-order uncertainty propagation as the analytical estimator. In a comprehensive evaluation across heterogeneous datasets, we compare analytical and empirical estimates of uncertainty propagation and evaluate their robustness. Extending previous work on inconsistencies in explanations, our experiments identify XAI methods that do not reliably capture and propagate uncertainty. Our findings underscore the importance of uncertainty-aware explanations in high-stakes applications and offer new insights into the limitations of current XAI methods. The code for the experiments can be found in our repository at https://github.com/TeodorChiaburu/UXAI

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2025.

Builds on

20 of 28 references.

References · 20

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  3. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
  4. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
  5. 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,319
  6. 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,156
  7. 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 990
  8. 2017The (Un)reliability of saliency methodscited by 333
  9. 2016Not Just a Black Box: Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 297
  10. 2022CRAFT: Concept Recursive Activation FacTorization for Explainabilitycited by 178
  11. 2022Quantus: An Explainable AI Toolkit for Responsible Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations and Beyondcited by 171
  12. 2020Debugging Tests for Model Explanationscited by 147
8 more
  1. 2020Reliable Post hoc Explanations: Modeling Uncertainty in Explainabilitycited by 125
  2. 2019CXPlain: Causal Explanations for Model Interpretation under Uncertaintycited by 98
  3. 2018A Theoretical Explanation for Perplexing Behaviors of Backpropagation-based Visualizationscited by 60
  4. 2020BayLIME: Bayesian Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanationscited by 51
  5. 2019Quantifying Interpretability and Trust in Machine Learning Systemscited by 49
  6. 2019Why are Saliency Maps Noisy? Cause of and Solution to Noisy Saliency Mapscited by 34
  7. 2022Xplique: A Deep Learning Explainability Toolboxcited by 24
  8. 2024CoProNN: Concept-based Prototypical Nearest Neighbors for Explaining Vision Modelscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 4.

6 papers.