Explanations as Bias Detectors: A Critical Study of Local Post-hoc XAI Methods for Fairness Exploration
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in areas that significantly impact human lives, concerns about fairness and transparency have grown, especially regarding their impact on protected groups. Recently, the intersection of explainability and fairness has emerged as an important area to promote responsible AI systems. This paper explores how explainability methods can be leveraged to detect and interpret unfairness. We propose a pipeline that integrates local post-hoc explanation methods to derive fairness-related insights. During the pipeline design, we identify and address critical questions arising from the use of explanations as bias detectors such as the relationship between distributive and procedural fairness, the effect of removing the protected attribute, the consistency and quality of results across different explanation methods, the impact of various aggregation strategies of local explanations on group fairness evaluations, and the overall trustworthiness of explanations as bias detectors. Our results show the potential of explanation methods used for fairness while highlighting the need to carefully consider the aforementioned critical aspects.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 May 2025.
Builds on
28 of 42 references.
References · 28
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
- 2019Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AIcited by 1,552
- 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,312
- 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 973
- 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 614
- 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 449
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 443
- 2021A survey on datasets for fairness-aware machine learningcited by 157
- 2018Explaining Explanations in AIcited by 137
- 2024Black-Box Access is Insufficient for Rigorous AI Auditscited by 126
- 2021Counterfactual Explanations Can Be Manipulatedcited by 113
16 more
- 2021The Out-of-Distribution Problem in Explainability and Search Methods for Feature Importance Explanationscited by 87
- 2020Contextualizing Hate Speech Classifiers with Post-hoc Explanationcited by 84
- 2021Fairness in Rankings and Recommendations: An Overviewcited by 62
- 2020Explainability for fair machine learningcited by 34
- 2019Global Aggregations of Local Explanations for Black Box modelscited by 30
- 2023Fairness and Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: a Multidisciplinary Surveycited by 30
- 2023GLOBE-CE: A Translation-Based Approach for Global Counterfactual Explanationscited by 27
- 2022Marrying Fairness and Explainability in Supervised Learningcited by 23
- 2024Machine Learning Data Practices through a Data Curation Lens: An Evaluation Frameworkcited by 18
- 2023A Critical Survey on Fairness Benefits of Explainable AIcited by 16
- 2020LimeOut: An Ensemble Approach To Improve Process Fairnesscited by 11
- 2020Biased Models Have Biased Explanationscited by 10
- 2024TABCF: Counterfactual Explanations for Tabular Data Using a Transformer-Based VAEcited by 8
- 2019Measuring Unfairness through Game-Theoretic Interpretabilitycited by 7
- 2024Toward Understanding the Disagreement Problem in Neural Network Feature Attributioncited by 6
- 2020Making ML models fairer through explanations: the case of LimeOutcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
2 papers.