# Evaluating Explainability in Safety-Critical ATR Systems: Limitations of Post-Hoc Methods and Paths Toward Robust XAI

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05748 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.05748/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 15 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 15 of 15)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.01497/) (2015)
- [End-to-End Object Detection with Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.12872/) (2020)
- [Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02391/) (2016)
- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.02640/) (2015)
- [Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.01365/) (2017)
- [Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6034/) (2013)
- [Sanity Checks for Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.03292/) (2018)
- [Attention is not Explanation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.10186/) (2019)
- [Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragile](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.10547/) (2017)
- [Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02508/) (2019)
- [Analysis of Explainers of Black Box Deep Neural Networks for Computer Vision: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.12116/) (2019)
- [ODExAI: A Comprehensive Object Detection Explainable AI Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19249/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is increasingly rec ognized as essential for deploying machine learning systems in safety critical environments. In Automatic Target Recognition (ATR), where models operate on image, video, radar, and multisensor data, high pre dictive performance alone is insufficient. Model decisions must also be interpretable, reliable, and suitable for validation. This paper presents a structured evaluation of explainability methods in the context of safety-critical ATR systems: We identify major XAI paradigms, including saliency-based, attention-based, and surrogate ap proaches, as well as recent detection-aware extensions. Based on this, we formalize explainability as an assurance-oriented assessment problem, introduce a taxonomy, and assess these methods with respect to four key dimensions: interpretability, robustness, vulnerability to manipula tion, and suitability for validation and verification. The analysis identifies systematic limitations of current post-hoc explanation methods. In par ticular, we derive critical failure modes such as spurious explanations, instability under perturbations, and overtrust induced by visually con vincing outputs. These findings indicate that widely used XAI techniques may be insufficient for safety-critical deployment. Finally, we discuss implications for ATR systems and outline directions toward more robust, causally grounded, and physically informed explain ability methods. Our results emphasize the need to move beyond visually plausible explanations toward approaches that support reliable decision making and system-level assurance.