mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Evaluation Cards for XAI Metrics

arXiv 2605.04410 ↗First posted 6 May 2026cs.CV cs.AI cs.CYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The evaluation of explainable AI (XAI) methods is affected by a lack of standardization. Metrics are inconsistently defined, incompletely reported, and rarely validated against common baselines. In this paper, we identify transparency of evaluation reporting as a central, under-addressed problem. We propose the XAI Evaluation Card, a documentation template analogous to model cards, designed to accompany any study that introduces an XAI evaluation metric. The card covers explicit declaration of target properties, grounding levels, metric assumptions, validation evidence, gaming risks, and known failure cases. We argue that adopting this template as a community norm would reduce evaluation fragmentation, support meta-analysis, and improve accountability in XAI research.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 May 2026.

Builds on

9 of 17 references.

References · 9

  1. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  2. 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
  3. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
  4. 2018RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Modelscited by 825
  5. 2022From Anecdotal Evidence to Quantitative Evaluation Methods: A Systematic Review on Evaluating Explainable AIcited by 299
  6. 2019Explainability Fact Sheets: A Framework for Systematic Assessment of Explainable Approachescited by 101
  7. 2024Explainable AI (XAI) in Image Segmentation in Medicine, Industry, and Beyond: A Surveycited by 11
  8. 2025Unifying VXAI: A Systematic Review and Framework for the Evaluation of Explainable AIcited by 5
  9. 2025On the Design and Evaluation of Human-centered Explainable AI Systems: A Systematic Review and Taxonomycited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.