The rising popularity of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to understand high-performing black boxes raised the question of how to evaluate explanations of machine learning (ML) models. While interpretability and explainability are often presented as a subjectively validated binary property, we consider it a multi-faceted concept. We identify 12 conceptual properties, such as Compactness and Correctness, that should be evaluated for comprehensively assessing the quality of an explanation. Our so-called Co-12 properties serve as categorization scheme for systematically reviewing the evaluation practices of more than 300 papers published in the past 7 years at major AI and ML conferences that introduce an XAI method. We find that one in three papers evaluate exclusively with anecdotal evidence, and one in five papers evaluate with users. This survey also contributes to the call for objective, quantifiable evaluation methods by presenting an extensive overview of quantitative XAI evaluation methods. Our systematic collection of evaluation methods provides researchers and practitioners with concrete tools to thoroughly validate, benchmark, and compare new and existing XAI methods. The Co-12 categorization scheme and our identified evaluation methods open up opportunities to include quantitative metrics as optimization criteria during model training to optimize for accuracy and interpretability simultaneously.

A major hurdle in the development of natural language processing (NLP) methods for Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is the lack of large, annotated datasets. Privacy concerns prevent the distribution of EHRs, and the annotation of data is known to be costly and cumbersome. Synthetic data presents a promising solution to the privacy concern, if synthetic data has comparable utility to real data and if it preserves the privacy of patients. However, the generation of synthetic text alone is not useful for NLP because of the lack of annotations. In this work, we propose the use of neural language models (LSTM and GPT-2) for generating artificial EHR text jointly with annotations for named-entity recognition. Our experiments show that artificial documents can be used to train a supervised named-entity recognition model for de-identification, which outperforms a state-of-the-art rule-based baseline. Moreover, we show that combining real data with synthetic data improves the recall of the method, without manual annotation effort. We conduct a user study to gain insights on the privacy of artificial text. We highlight privacy risks associated with language models to inform future research on privacy-preserving automated text generation and metrics for evaluating privacy-preservation during text generation.

Sebastian Joseph, Lily Chen, Jan Trienes, Hannah Göke, Monika Coers, Wei Xu, Byron Wallace, Junyi Jessy Li. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024.

The rising popularity of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to understand high-performing black boxes raised the question of how to evaluate explanations of machine learning (ML) models. While interpretability and explainability are often presented as a subjectively validated binary property, we consider it a multi-faceted concept. We identify 12 conceptual properties, such as Compactness and Correctness, that should be evaluated for comprehensively assessing the quality of an explanation. Our so-called Co-12 properties serve as categorization scheme for systematically reviewing the evaluation practices of more than 300 papers published in the last 7 years at major AI and ML conferences that introduce an XAI method. We find that 1 in 3 papers evaluate exclusively with anecdotal evidence, and 1 in 5 papers evaluate with users. This survey also contributes to the call for objective, quantifiable evaluation methods by presenting an extensive overview of quantitative XAI evaluation methods. Our systematic collection of evaluation methods provides researchers and practitioners with concrete tools to thoroughly validate, benchmark and compare new and existing XAI methods. The Co-12 categorization scheme and our identified evaluation methods open up opportunities to include quantitative metrics as optimization criteria during model training in order to optimize for accuracy and interpretability simultaneously.