In het boek komen 40 experts aan het woord, die in duidelijke taal uitleggen wat AI is, en welke vragen, uitdagingen en kansen de technologie met zich meebrengt.
DOCUMENT
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) aims to provide insights into the inner workings and the outputs of AI systems. Recently, there’s been growing recognition that explainability is inherently human-centric, tied to how people perceive explanations. Despite this, there is no consensus in the research community on whether user evaluation is crucial in XAI, and if so, what exactly needs to be evaluated and how. This systematic literature review addresses this gap by providing a detailed overview of the current state of affairs in human-centered XAI evaluation. We reviewed 73 papers across various domains where XAI was evaluated with users. These studies assessed what makes an explanation “good” from a user’s perspective, i.e., what makes an explanation meaningful to a user of an AI system. We identified 30 components of meaningful explanations that were evaluated in the reviewed papers and categorized them into a taxonomy of human-centered XAI evaluation, based on: (a) the contextualized quality of the explanation, (b) the contribution of the explanation to human-AI interaction, and (c) the contribution of the explanation to human- AI performance. Our analysis also revealed a lack of standardization in the methodologies applied in XAI user studies, with only 19 of the 73 papers applying an evaluation framework used by at least one other study in the sample. These inconsistencies hinder cross-study comparisons and broader insights. Our findings contribute to understanding what makes explanations meaningful to users and how to measure this, guiding the XAI community toward a more unified approach in human-centered explainability.
MULTIFILE
In the book, 40 experts speak, who explain in clear language what AI is, and what questions, challenges and opportunities the technology brings.
DOCUMENT
Artificial Intelligence (AI) offers organizations unprecedented opportunities. However, one of the risks of using AI is that its outcomes and inner workings are not intelligible. In industries where trust is critical, such as healthcare and finance, explainable AI (XAI) is a necessity. However, the implementation of XAI is not straightforward, as it requires addressing both technical and social aspects. Previous studies on XAI primarily focused on either technical or social aspects and lacked a practical perspective. This study aims to empirically examine the XAI related aspects faced by developers, users, and managers of AI systems during the development process of the AI system. To this end, a multiple case study was conducted in two Dutch financial services companies using four use cases. Our findings reveal a wide range of aspects that must be considered during XAI implementation, which we grouped and integrated into a conceptual model. This model helps practitioners to make informed decisions when developing XAI. We argue that the diversity of aspects to consider necessitates an XAI “by design” approach, especially in high-risk use cases in industries where the stakes are high such as finance, public services, and healthcare. As such, the conceptual model offers a taxonomy for method engineering of XAI related methods, techniques, and tools.
MULTIFILE
Explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) is seen as a solution to making AI systems less of a “black box”. It is essential to ensure transparency, fairness, and accountability – which are especially paramount in the financial sector. The aim of this study was a preliminary investigation of the perspectives of supervisory authorities and regulated entities regarding the application of xAI in the financial sector. Three use cases (consumer credit, credit risk, and anti-money laundering) were examined using semi-structured interviews at three banks and two supervisory authorities in the Netherlands. We found that for the investigated use cases a disparity exists between supervisory authorities and banks regarding the desired scope of explainability of AI systems. We argue that the financial sector could benefit from clear differentiation between technical AI (model) explainability requirements and explainability requirements of the broader AI system in relation to applicable laws and regulations.
LINK
The healthcare sector has been confronted with rapidly rising healthcare costs and a shortage of medical staff. At the same time, the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising area of research, offering potential benefits for healthcare. Despite the potential of AI to support healthcare, its widespread implementation, especially in healthcare, remains limited. One possible factor contributing to that is the lack of trust in AI algorithms among healthcare professionals. Previous studies have indicated that explainability plays a crucial role in establishing trust in AI systems. This study aims to explore trust in AI and its connection to explainability in a medical setting. A rapid review was conducted to provide an overview of the existing knowledge and research on trust and explainability. Building upon these insights, a dashboard interface was developed to present the output of an AI-based decision-support tool along with explanatory information, with the aim of enhancing explainability of the AI for healthcare professionals. To investigate the impact of the dashboard and its explanations on healthcare professionals, an exploratory case study was conducted. The study encompassed an assessment of participants’ trust in the AI system, their perception of its explainability, as well as their evaluations of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. The initial findings from the case study indicate a positive correlation between perceived explainability and trust in the AI system. Our preliminary findings suggest that enhancing the explainability of AI systems could increase trust among healthcare professionals. This may contribute to an increased acceptance and adoption of AI in healthcare. However, a more elaborate experiment with the dashboard is essential.
LINK
Abstract Aims: Medical case vignettes play a crucial role in medical education, yet they often fail to authentically represent diverse patients. Moreover, these vignettes tend to oversimplify the complex relationship between patient characteristics and medical conditions, leading to biased and potentially harmful perspectives among students. Displaying aspects of patient diversity, such as ethnicity, in written cases proves challenging. Additionally, creating these cases places a significant burden on teachers in terms of labour and time. Our objective is to explore the potential of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted computer-generated clinical cases to expedite case creation and enhance diversity, along with AI-generated patient photographs for more lifelike portrayal. Methods: In this study, we employed ChatGPT (OpenAI, GPT 3.5) to develop diverse and inclusive medical case vignettes. We evaluated various approaches and identified a set of eight consecutive prompts that can be readily customized to accommodate local contexts and specific assignments. To enhance visual representation, we utilized Adobe Firefly beta for image generation. Results: Using the described prompts, we consistently generated cases for various assignments, producing sets of 30 cases at a time. We ensured the inclusion of mandatory checks and formatting, completing the process within approximately 60 min per set. Conclusions: Our approach significantly accelerated case creation and improved diversity, although prioritizing maximum diversity compromised representativeness to some extent. While the optimized prompts are easily reusable, the process itself demands computer skills not all educators possess. To address this, we aim to share all created patients as open educational resources, empowering educators to create cases independently.
DOCUMENT
This white paper is the result of a research project by Hogeschool Utrecht, Floryn, Researchable, and De Volksbank in the period November 2021-November 2022. The research project was a KIEM project1 granted by the Taskforce for Applied Research SIA. The goal of the research project was to identify the aspects that play a role in the implementation of the explainability of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in the Dutch financial sector. In this white paper, we present a checklist of the aspects that we derived from this research. The checklist contains checkpoints and related questions that need consideration to make explainability-related choices in different stages of the AI lifecycle. The goal of the checklist is to give designers and developers of AI systems a tool to ensure the AI system will give proper and meaningful explanations to each stakeholder.
MULTIFILE
Dit artikel legt het belang uit van goede uitleg van kunstmatige intelligentie. Rechten van individuen zullen door ontwerpers van systemen van te voren moeten worden ingebouwd. AI wordt beschouwd als een 'sleuteltechnologie' die de wereld net zo ingrijpend gaat veranderen als de industriele revolutie. Binnen de stroming XAI wordt onderzoek gedaan naar interpretatie van werking van AI.
DOCUMENT
This guide was developed for designers and developers of AI systems, with the goal of ensuring that these systems are sufficiently explainable. Sufficient here means that it meets the legal requirements from AI Act and GDPR and that users can use the system properly. Explainability of decisions is an important requirement in many systems and even an important principle for AI systems [HLEG19]. In many AI systems, explainability is not self-evident. AI researchers expect that the challenge of making AI explainable will only increase. For one thing, this comes from the applications: AI will be used more and more often, for larger and more sensitive decisions. On the other hand, organizations are making better and better models, for example, by using more different inputs. With more complex AI models, it is often less clear how a decision was made. Organizations that will deploy AI must take into account users' need for explanations. Systems that use AI should be designed to provide the user with appropriate explanations. In this guide, we first explain the legal requirements for explainability of AI systems. These come from the GDPR and the AI Act. Next, we explain how AI is used in the financial sector and elaborate on one problem in detail. For this problem, we then show how the user interface can be modified to make the AI explainable. These designs serve as prototypical examples that can be adapted to new problems. This guidance is based on explainability of AI systems for the financial sector. However, the advice can also be used in other sectors.
DOCUMENT
