LIME-LLM: Probing Models with Fluent Counterfactuals, Not Broken Text
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Local explanation methods such as LIME (Ribeiro et al., 2016) remain fundamental to trustworthy AI, yet their application to NLP is limited by a reliance on random token masking. These heuristic perturbations frequently generate semantically invalid, out-of-distribution inputs that weaken the fidelity of local surrogate models. While recent generative approaches such as LLiMe (Angiulli et al., 2025b) attempt to mitigate this by employing Large Language Models for neighborhood generation, they rely on unconstrained paraphrasing that introduces confounding variables, making it difficult to isolate specific feature contributions. We introduce LIME-LLM, a framework that replaces random noise with hypothesis-driven, controlled perturbations. By enforcing a strict "Single Mask-Single Sample" protocol and employing distinct neutral infill and boundary infill strategies, LIME-LLM constructs fluent, on-manifold neighborhoods that rigorously isolate feature effects. We evaluate our method against established baselines (LIME, SHAP, Integrated Gradients) and the generative LLiMe baseline across three diverse benchmarks: CoLA, SST-2, and HateXplain using human-annotated rationales as ground truth. Empirical results demonstrate that LIME-LLM establishes a new benchmark for black-box NLP explainability, achieving significant improvements in local explanation fidelity compared to both traditional perturbation-based methods and recent generative alternatives.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jan 2026.
Builds on
24 of 39 references.
References · 24
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
- 2018Neural Network Acceptability Judgmentscited by 952
- 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 590
- 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 523
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
- 2020HateXplain: A Benchmark Dataset for Explainable Hate Speech Detectioncited by 403
- 2019On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanationscited by 309
12 more
- 2020A Diagnostic Study of Explainability Techniques for Text Classificationcited by 158
- 2018Pathologies of Neural Models Make Interpretations Difficultcited by 140
- 2018How do Humans Understand Explanations from Machine Learning Systems? An Evaluation of the Human-Interpretability of Explanationcited by 71
- 2019DLIME: A Deterministic Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations Approach for Computer-Aided Diagnosis Systemscited by 59
- 2021S-LIME: Stabilized-LIME for Model Explanationcited by 52
- 2020BayLIME: Bayesian Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanationscited by 51
- 2020OptiLIME: Optimized LIME Explanations for Diagnostic Computer Algorithmscited by 30
- 2023GLIME: General, Stable and Local LIME Explanationcited by 21
- 2024Multi-Level Explanations for Generative Language Modelscited by 11
- 2024SIDU-TXT: An XAI Algorithm for NLP with a Holistic Assessment Approachcited by 4
- 2023Explaining text classifiers through progressive neighborhood approximation with realistic samplescited by 1
- 2024Transparent Neighborhood Approximation for Text Classifier Explanationcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.