This paper proposes a user study aimed at evaluating the impact of Class Activation Maps (CAMs) as an eXplainable AI (XAI) method in a radiological diagnostic task, the detection of thoracolumbar (TL) fractures from vertebral X-rays. In particular, we focus on two oft-neglected features of CAMs, that is granularity and coloring, in terms of what features, lower-level vs higher-level, should the maps highlight and adopting which coloring scheme, to bring better impact to the decision-making process, both in terms of diagnostic accuracy (that is effectiveness) and of user-centered dimensions, such as perceived confidence and utility (that is satisfaction), depending on case complexity, AI accuracy, and user expertise. Our findings show that lower-level features CAMs, which highlight more focused anatomical landmarks, are associated with higher diagnostic accuracy than higher-level features CAMs, particularly among experienced physicians. Moreover, despite the intuitive appeal of semantic CAMs, traditionally colored CAMs consistently yielded higher diagnostic accuracy across all groups. Our results challenge some prevalent assumptions in the XAI field and emphasize the importance of adopting an evidence-based and human-centered approach to design and evaluate AI- and XAI-assisted diagnostic tools. To this aim, the paper also proposes a hierarchy of evidence framework to help designers and practitioners choose the XAI solutions that optimize performance and satisfaction on the basis of the strongest evidence available or to focus on the gaps in the literature that need to be filled to move from opinionated and eminence-based research to one more based on empirical evidence and end-user work and preferences.

Human Activity Recognition (HAR) has been studied extensively, yet current approaches are not capable of generalizing across different domains (i.e., subjects, devices, or datasets) with acceptable performance. This lack of generalization hinders the applicability of these models in real-world environments. As deep neural networks are becoming increasingly popular in recent work, there is a need for an explicit comparison between handcrafted and deep representations in Out-of-Distribution (OOD) settings. This paper compares both approaches in multiple domains using homogenized public datasets. First, we compare several metrics to validate three different OOD settings. In our main experiments, we then verify that even though deep learning initially outperforms models with handcrafted features, the situation is reversed as the distance from the training distribution increases. These findings support the hypothesis that handcrafted features may generalize better across specific domains.