# The Role of Explanation Styles and Perceived Accuracy on Decision Making in Predictive Process Monitoring

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16617 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.16617/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 13 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Jun 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- ["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)
- [Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08608/) (2017)
- [Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07697/) (2019)
- [Survey and cross-benchmark comparison of remaining time prediction methods in business process monitoring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.02896/) (2018)
- [Statistical stability indices for LIME: obtaining reliable explanations for Machine Learning models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.11757/) (2020)
- [DiCE4EL: Interpreting Process Predictions using a Milestone-Aware Counterfactual Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.08697/) (2021)
- [Counterfactual Explanations for Predictive Business Process Monitoring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.12018/) (2022)
- [An Explainable Decision Support System for Predictive Process Analytics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.12782/) (2022)
- [Building Interpretable Models for Business Process Prediction using Shared and Specialised Attention Mechanisms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.01419/) (2021)
- [Explainability in Process Outcome Prediction: Guidelines to Obtain Interpretable and Faithful Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.16073/) (2022)
- [CREATED: Generating Viable Counterfactual Sequences for Predictive Process Analytics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15844/) (2023)
- [Explainable Predictive Process Monitoring: A User Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.07760/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Predictive Process Monitoring (PPM) often uses deep learning models to predict the future behavior of ongoing processes, such as predicting process outcomes. While these models achieve high accuracy, their lack of interpretability undermines user trust and adoption. Explainable AI (XAI) aims to address this challenge by providing the reasoning behind the predictions. However, current evaluations of XAI in PPM focus primarily on functional metrics (such as fidelity), overlooking user-centered aspects such as their effect on task performance and decision-making. This study investigates the effects of explanation styles (feature importance, rule-based, and counterfactual) and perceived AI accuracy (low or high) on decision-making in PPM. We conducted a decision-making experiment, where users were presented with the AI predictions, perceived accuracy levels, and explanations of different styles. Users' decisions were measured both before and after receiving explanations, allowing the assessment of objective metrics (Task Performance and Agreement) and subjective metrics (Decision Confidence). Our findings show that perceived accuracy and explanation style have a significant effect.