ExplainGuard: A Zero Trust Framework for Post-Hoc Explanation Integrity Guarantees in Blackbox XAI Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As machine learning (ML) models are increasingly deployed in high-stakes environments, explainable AI (XAI) methods like SHAP and LIME have become essential for regulatory compliance and trust. However, the current auditing paradigm relies on an implicit "chain of trust" where third-party auditors are assumed to be trusted. Recent research demonstrates that this assumption is flawed and adversarial auditors can manipulate XAI explanations through manipulation attacks such as output shuffling or scaffolding out-of-distribution (OOD) to conceal model biases while maintaining high prediction accuracy aiming for fairwashed explanation. In this paper, we introduce a novel defense framework, ExplainGuard, that leverages a Zero-Trust architecture (ZTA) design to be incorporated within the XAI explanation supply chain and ensures the integrity of the generated explanation. This framework would help us to replace the ambiguous default assumption of "auditor is trustworthy," with a continuous "verify-then-trust" approach. Our design architecture establishes a Policy Decision Point (PDP) that enforces three distinct pillars of verification before any explanation is released to the user: (1) asset integrity via behavioral fingerprint to detect model substitution, (2) semantic validity using axiomatic consistency checks to reject mathematically impossible explanations, and (3) feature faithfulness verification utilizing a ranking stability approach with minimal computational overhead. Finally, we evaluate how ExplainGuard can effectively neutralize state- of-the-art explanation manipulation attacks while transforming the auditing process into a verifiable operation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Aug 2026.
Builds on
15 of 31 references.
References · 15
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
- 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 443
- 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 419
- 2016Layer-wise Relevance Propagation for Neural Networks with Local Renormalization Layerscited by 199
- 2020Counterfactual Explanations and Algorithmic Recourses for Machine Learning: A Reviewcited by 174
- 2019Fairwashing: the risk of rationalizationcited by 81
- 2021Shapley values for feature selection: The good, the bad, and the axiomscited by 54
- 2022Unfooling Perturbation-Based Post Hoc Explainerscited by 12
3 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.