The DOI matches its Crossref record; 171 of the 173 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“There can be multiple ways of making data and code accessible, and there can be multiple ways to justify a decision and different degrees of transparency in the decision (Miller 2019; Mittelstadt et al. 2019).”
From Explaining Why the Computer Says No: Algorithmic Transparency Affects the Perceived Trustworthiness of Automated Decision‐Making (2023) · cites this paper as Miller 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“For instance, machine-learning algorithms can be programmed in a way they can explain based on what data and which decision rules certain predictions were reached, this is called explainable AI (xAI).”
From Legitimacy of Algorithmic Decision-Making: Six Threats and the Need for a Calibrated Institutional Response (2022) · cites this paper as Miller 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Also, user experience (UX) in XAI, specifically Human-AI collaborative decision-making, may require more attention than the explanation ease of use [47].”
From Explainable recommendation: when design meets trust calibration (2021) · cites this paper as [47]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Some users prefer a detailed explanation, while others need a brief explanation based on their curiosity level [47].”
From Explainable recommendation: when design meets trust calibration (2021) · cites this paper as [47]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“To the best of our knowledge, there is little to no empirical research on the effectiveness of these two humancentered explanations derived from the literature (i.e., Adadi and Berrada, 2018) using Miller's criteria in fostering end-users' trust in AI.”
From Exploring the effects of human-centered AI explanations on trust and reliance (2023) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Counterfactuals combine Miller's selectivity and contrastivity criteria.”
From Exploring the effects of human-centered AI explanations on trust and reliance (2023) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“we identified feature importance explanations and counterfactual explanations as two promising post-hoc explanations for achieving HCXAI.”
From Exploring the effects of human-centered AI explanations on trust and reliance (2023) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Social science literature suggests that natural human explanations are predominantly qualitative [63]-while people may have an intuition about which feature is relevant to the decision, or which feature is more relevant than another, they may not be able to articulate a precise quantification.”
From Understanding the Role of Human Intuition on Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making with Explanations (2023) · cites this paper as [63]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Tim Miller argues for the situation of AI explanations within social and human sciences literature on cognition and decision making, given that the problems XAI addresses are fundamentally those of the relationships between people rather than people and technology [ 43 ].”
From Positioning Paradata: A Conceptual Frame for AI Processual Documentation in Archives and Recordkeeping Contexts (2023) · cites this paper as [43]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“HCI skills such as philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science have proven their worth in the field of XAI by developing explanations that were able to stimulate the human explanation process [89].”
From Interpreting Black-Box Models: A Review on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2024) · cites this paper as [89]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In addition, they state that explanations are selective , meaning that focusing solely on the main causes of a decision-making process is sufficient.”
From Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI (2020) · cites this paper as [12]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Explanations that explicitly contrast correct diagnoses against plausible alternatives (contrastive explanations) may be particularly valuable for teaching differential diagnosis skills [159].”
From Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [159]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This finding challenges the common belief that counterfactual explanations, which simulate AI reasoning, are easily understandable and enhance trust [24].”
From AI Trust: Can Explainable AI Enhance Warranted Trust? (2023) · cites this paper as [24]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Interventions that cue users to reflect on their goals and strategies via question prompts or conversational interfaces have been shown to improve outcomes in the workplace [92,122,209], education [51], and other domains [17,147].”
From The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI (2024) · cites this paper as [122]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, further complications are introduced when AI systems produce outputs in interaction with humans or other AI or complex sociotechnical systems (Borrego-Díaz & Galán-Páez, 2022;Miller, 2019).”
From Hidden Risks: Artificial Intelligence and Hermeneutic Harm (2025) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Most of the empirical research on algorithmic transparency has focused on the how, reflected in the explainability, interpretability and, ultimately, in the observability of algorithms (Miller, 2019;Robert et al., 2020;Shin, 2021;Shin & Park, 2019).”
From Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs (2022) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“xAI refers to the explainability of specific decisions, but can also refer to how a model works and develops (e.g., Miller 2019).”
From Legitimacy of Algorithmic Decision-Making: Six Threats and the Need for a Calibrated Institutional Response (2022) · cites this paper as Miller 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Such explanations thus satisfy the selectivity criterion proposed by Miller (2019) because they show how certain factors influenced a decision.”
From Exploring the effects of human-centered AI explanations on trust and reliance (2023) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, studies show that many XAI methods are designed according to developers' intuition of what constitutes a 'good' explanation, rather than actual insights into users' needs [73].”
From Explainable AI for Clinical Decision Support Systems: Literature Review, Key Gaps, and Research Synthesis (2025) · cites this paper as [73]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Much of the literature still speaks in subjective terms of 'good' or 'quality' explanations [73], often without measuring how well those explanations integrate into clinicians' decision-making processes.”
From Explainable AI for Clinical Decision Support Systems: Literature Review, Key Gaps, and Research Synthesis (2025) · cites this paper as [73]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The human trait of explaining the underlying reasoning behind a decision and applying this same logic and requirement in the context of AI is complex (Miller 2019).”
From Artificial Intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy (2021) · cites this paper as Miller 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“First, explanations are better when constrictive , meaning that a prerequisite for a good explanation is that it does not only indicate why the model made a decision X, but also why it made decision X rather than decision Y.”
From Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI (2020) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is also explained that probabilities are not as important as causal links in order to provide a satisfying explanation.”
From Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI (2020) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The concept of what defines a good explanation is not trivial and is an aspect that is widely studied in the literature (Miller, 2019; Holzinger et al., 2020).”
From Understanding user mental models in AI-driven code completion tools: Insights from an elicitation study (2025) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In an important contribution, Miller (2019) emphasises the importance of respecting explanatory practices as people experience them-in particular that good explanations are contrastive, i.e. that”
From Hidden Risks: Artificial Intelligence and Hermeneutic Harm (2025) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019, p. 3
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“social functions have to do with building or maintaining interpersonal relationships, creating shared meaning (Miller, 2019), and with supporting actions or societal practices (e.g.excusing or blaming others, or responding to decisions that affect one) (Mittelstadt et al., 2019;Wachter et al., 2018).”
From Hidden Risks: Artificial Intelligence and Hermeneutic Harm (2025) · cites this paper as Miller, 2019
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The rapid growth of AI has accelerated discoveries across diverse scientific fields and affected every work environment [62–65] and is reshaping the labor market with unprecedented speed and scale, with 40% of the global workforce expected to require AI, enhancing the need for significant AI upskilling or reskilling [66].”
From Use of artificial intelligence in critical care: opportunities and obstacles (2024) · cites this paper as [63]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Also, creating AI with the ability to explain and justify its decision-making process [5,38,44] could increase the end-users willingness to accept the AI's recommendations [53,55].”
From Being Trustworthy is Not Enough: How Untrustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) Can Deceive the End-Users and Gain Their Trust (2023) · cites this paper as [38]
In the citing paper
“In three studies [67], [128], [137], the classifiers used in the experiments are not specified.”
From A Survey of Contrastive and Counterfactual Explanation Generation Methods for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as [137]
In the citing paper
“Contfactual explanations, as a mixture of tabular and visual output representations, appear also in an augmented reality framework [137].”
From A Survey of Contrastive and Counterfactual Explanation Generation Methods for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as [137]
In the citing paper
“However, the two aforementioned studies [128], [137] lack an evaluation of the quality of the generated contfactual explanations themselves.”
From A Survey of Contrastive and Counterfactual Explanation Generation Methods for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as [137]
In the citing paper
“Miller argues that a good explanation is contrastive, selective, and truthful.”
From Explainable AI in medical imaging: An overview for clinical practitioners – Beyond saliency-based XAI approaches (2023) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“However, some research asserts that this approach is the most intuitive for human users to comprehend [7].”
From Explainable AI in medical imaging: An overview for clinical practitioners – Beyond saliency-based XAI approaches (2023) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“because humans tend to devalue explanations that contradict their prior beliefs.”
From Explainable AI in medical imaging: An overview for clinical practitioners – Beyond saliency-based XAI approaches (2023) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“which are not only intuitively understandable for humans [7]”
From Explainable AI in medical imaging: An overview for clinical practitioners – Beyond saliency-based XAI approaches (2023) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“Generative AI can provide personalized learning plans and tools based on students' individual needs and learning styles to improve learning efficiency and effectiveness.”
From Generative artificial intelligence empowers educational reform: current status, issues, and prospects (2023) · cites this paper as Miller, 2017
In the citing paper
“However, this personalized learning can also lead to unfair outcomes, as different students may face different opportunities and challenges.”
From Generative artificial intelligence empowers educational reform: current status, issues, and prospects (2023) · cites this paper as Miller, 2017
In the citing paper
“In addition, if generative AI models only focus on students' individual needs and interests, and ignore some important learning objectives and standards, this may also lead to students' knowledge and skills being less comprehensive and in-depth (Miller, 2017).”
From Generative artificial intelligence empowers educational reform: current status, issues, and prospects (2023) · cites this paper as Miller, 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Grice, H. P. (1975) · Speech Acts · doi:10.1163/9789004368811_003 · Cited by 23,221
"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier
Ribeiro, M. T., Singh, S., & Guestrin, C. (2016) · Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/2939672.2939778 · Cited by 17,555
The psychology of interpersonal relations
Heider, F. (1958) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089062 · Cited by 17,189
(2011) · Cited by 14,317
“Why Should I Trust You?”: Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier
Ribeiro, M., Singh, S., & Guestrin, C. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Demonstrations · doi:10.18653/v1/n16-3020 · Cited by 6,682
Marr, D. (1982) · Cumulative Index of Computer Aided Architectural Design · Cited by 5,733
Lipton, Z. C. (2018) · Queue · doi:10.1145/3236386.3241340 · Cited by 5,427
(1987) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,269
Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.90.4.293 · Cited by 3,991
Halpern, J. Y. (1994) · Mathematical Social Sciences · doi:10.1016/0165-4896(94)90005-1 · Cited by 3,620
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Angwin, 2016, Machine bias, ProPublica
- Causation, 1974, J. Philos., 70, 556
- McClure, 2003, The role of goal-based explanations, vol. 5, 306
- Peirce, 1903, Harvard lectures on pragmatism, vol. 5
- Van Fraassen, 1977, The pragmatics of explanation, Am. Philos. Q., 14, 143
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Barredo Arrieta, A., Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J., Bennetot, A., Tabik, S., Barbado, A., Garcia, S., Gil-Lopez, S., Molina, D., Benjamins, R., et al. (2020) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012 · Cited by 10,423
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Adadi, A., & Berrada, M. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2870052 · Cited by 6,294
Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., Duan, Y., Dwivedi, R., Edwards, J., Eirug, A., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002 · Cited by 4,611
“classification or forecast can be complex for AI based systems (Miller, 2019).”
BackgroundInfluentialMachine learning and deep learning
Janiesch, C., Zschech, P., & Heinrich, K. (2021) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-021-00475-2 · Cited by 2,959
Explainable AI: a review of machine learning interpretability methods
Linardatos, P., Papastefanopoulos, V., & Kotsiantis, S. (2020) · Entropy · doi:10.3390/e23010018 · Cited by 2,922
Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.021 · Cited by 2,628
Interpreting Black-Box Models: A Review on Explainable Artificial Intelligence
Hassija, V., Chamola, V., Mahapatra, A., Singal, A., Goel, D., Huang, K., Scardapane, S., Spinelli, I., Mahmud, M., & Hussain, A. (2024) · Cognitive Computation · doi:10.1007/s12559-023-10179-8 · Cited by 2,495
“HCI skills such as philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science have proven their worth in the field of XAI by developing explanations that were able to stimulate the human explanation process [89].”
BackgroundXAI—Explainable artificial intelligence
Gunning, D., Stefik, M., Choi, J., Miller, T., Stumpf, S., & Yang, G.-Z. (2019) · Science Robotics · doi:10.1126/scirobotics.aay7120 · Cited by 2,053
Self-citationCausability and explainability of artificial intelligence in medicine
Holzinger, A., Langs, G., Denk, H., Zatloukal, K., & Müller, H. (2019) · WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1002/widm.1312 · Cited by 1,885
Machine Learning Interpretability: A Survey on Methods and Metrics
Carvalho, D. V., Pereira, E. M., & Cardoso, J. S. (2019) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics8080832 · Cited by 1,842
Ali, S., Abuhmed, T., El-Sappagh, S., Muhammad, K., Alonso-Moral, J. M., Confalonieri, R., Guidotti, R., Del Ser, J., Díaz-Rodríguez, N., & Herrera, F. (2023) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2023.101805 · Cited by 1,762
Explaining Deep Neural Networks and Beyond: A Review of Methods and Applications
Samek, W., Montavon, G., Lapuschkin, S., Anders, C. J., & Muller, K.-R. (2021) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2021.3060483 · Cited by 1,477
DARPA's Explainable Artificial Intelligence Program
Gunning, D., & Aha, D. W. (2019) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v40i2.2850 · Cited by 1,360
Drug discovery with explainable artificial intelligence
Jiménez-Luna, J., Grisoni, F., & Schneider, G. (2020) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-020-00236-4 · Cited by 1,063
Explainable machine learning for scientific insights and discoveries
Roscher, R., Bohn, B., Duarte, M. F., & Garcke, J. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2976199 · Cited by 1,040
A Survey on the Explainability of Supervised Machine Learning
Burkart, N., & Huber, M. F. (2021) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.12228 · Cited by 1,008
Explainable artificial intelligence: a comprehensive review
Minh, D., Wang, H. X., Li, Y. F., & Nguyen, T. N. (2022) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-021-10088-y · Cited by 983
Managing artificial intelligence
Berente, N., Gu, B., Recker, J., & Santhanam, R. (2021) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2021/16274 · Cited by 898
Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizons
Zhang, J. M., Harman, M., Ma, L., & Liu, Y. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2019.2962027 · Cited by 897
Explainable Artificial Intelligence in education
Khosravi, H., Shum, S. B., Chen, G., Conati, C., Tsai, Y.-S., Kay, J., Knight, S., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Sadiq, S., & Gašević, D. (2022) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100074 · Cited by 863
GNNExplainer: Generating Explanations for Graph Neural Networks
Ying, R., Bourgeois, D., You, J., Zitnik, M., & Leskovec, J. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.03894 · Cited by 850
Markus, A. F., Kors, J. A., & Rijnbeek, P. R. (2021) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2020.103655 · Cited by 811
Mittelstadt, B., Russell, C., & Wachter, S. (2019) · Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3287560.3287574 · Cited by 794
Explainable AI (XAI): A systematic meta-survey of current challenges and future opportunities
Saeed, W., & Omlin, C. (2023) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110273 · Cited by 783
Shneiderman, B. (2020) · ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1145/3419764 · Cited by 768
Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performance
Bansal, G., Wu, T., Zhou, J., Fok, R., Nushi, B., Kamar, E., Ribeiro, M. T., & Weld, D. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445717 · Cited by 757
“AI explanations are useful in many scenarios: communicating model predictions [17, 30, 33, 56], teaching humans tasks like translation [48] or content moderation [28], augmenting human analysis procedure [28] or creativity [14], legal imperatives [51, 64], and others.”
BackgroundDoes the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performance
Bansal, G., Wu, T., Zhou, J., Fok, R., Nushi, B., Kamar, E., Ribeiro, M. T., & Weld, D. S. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.14779 · Cited by 754
Machine learning for digital soil mapping: Applications, challenges and suggested solutions
Wadoux, A. M. J. ‐., Minasny, B., & McBratney, A. B. (2020) · Earth-Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103359 · Cited by 803
Abdul, A., Vermeulen, J., Wang, D., Lim, B. Y., & Kankanhalli, M. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3174156 · Cited by 743
Aldoseri, A., Al‐Khalifa, K. N., & Hamouda, A. M. S. (2023) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app13127082 · Cited by 908
Taxonomy of Risks posed by Language Models
Weidinger, L., Uesato, J., Rauh, M., Griffin, C., Huang, P.-S., Mellor, J., Glaese, A., Cheng, M., Balle, B., Kasirzadeh, A., et al. (2022) · 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3531146.3533088 · Cited by 764
Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence: A Review
Kaur, D., Uslu, S., Rittichier, K. J., & Durresi, A. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3491209 · Cited by 709
Jun, L., Chang, H., Forrest, J. Y., & Yang, B. (2020) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120142 · Cited by 707
Industrial Artificial Intelligence in Industry 4.0 - Systematic Review, Challenges and Outlook
Peres, R. S., Jia, X., Lee, J., Sun, K., Colombo, A. W., & Barata, J. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3042874 · Cited by 820
Explainable Recommendation a survey and new perspectives
Zhang, Y., & Chen, X. (2020) · Cited by 689
Interpretable Machine Learning – A Brief History, State-of-the-Art and Challenges
Molnar, C., Casalicchio, G., & Bischl, B. (2020) · Communications in Computer and Information Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65965-3_28 · Cited by 677
Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretability
Poursabzi-Sangdeh, F., Goldstein, D. G., Hofman, J. M., Wortman Vaughan, J. W., & Wallach, H. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445315 · Cited by 728
Explainable machine learning in deployment
Bhatt, U., Xiang, A., Sharma, S., Weller, A., Taly, A., Jia, Y., Ghosh, J., Puri, R., Moura, J. M. F., & Eckersley, P. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3351095.3375624 · Cited by 633
Mariani, M. M., Perez‐Vega, R., & Wirtz, J. (2022) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21619 · Cited by 631
Antoniadi, A. M., Du, Y., Guendouz, Y., Wei, L., Mazo, C., Becker, B. A., & Mooney, C. (2021) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app11115088 · Cited by 629
Langer, M., Oster, D., Speith, T., Hermanns, H., Kästner, L., Schmidt, E., Sesing, A., & Baum, K. (2021) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2021.103473 · Cited by 652
Fairness of artificial intelligence in healthcare: review and recommendations
Ueda, D., Kakinuma, T., Fujita, S., Kamagata, K., Fushimi, Y., Ito, R., Matsui, Y., Nozaki, T., Nakaura, T., Fujima, N., et al. (2024) · Japanese Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1007/s11604-023-01474-3 · Cited by 607
Evaluating the quality of machine learning explanations: a survey on methods and metrics
Zhou, J., Gandomi, A. H., Chen, F., & Holzinger, A. (2021) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics10050593 · Cited by 606
Generative artificial intelligence
Banh, L., & Strobel, G. (2023) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-023-00680-1 · Cited by 879
Notions of explainability and evaluation approaches for explainable artificial intelligence
Vilone, G., & Longo, L. (2021) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2021.05.009 · Cited by 598
Nauta, M., Trienes, J., Pathak, S., Nguyen, E., Peters, M., Schmitt, Y., Schlötterer, J., van Keulen, M., & Seifert, C. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3583558 · Cited by 590
Towards transparency by design for artificial intelligence
Felzmann, H., Fosch-Villaronga, E., Lutz, C., & Tamò-Larrieux, A. (2020) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-020-00276-4 · Cited by 588
Can Large Language Models Transform Computational Social Science?
Ziems, C., Held, W., Shaikh, O., Chen, J., Zhang, Z., & Yang, D. (2024) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00502 · Cited by 585
Interpretable Machine Learning in Healthcare
Ahmad, M. A., Eckert, C., & Teredesai, A. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology, and Health Informatics · doi:10.1145/3233547.3233667 · Cited by 583
Visual Analytics in Deep Learning: An Interrogative Survey for the Next Frontiers
Hohman, F., Kahng, M., Pienta, R., & Chau, D. H. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2018.2843369 · Cited by 582
A Multidisciplinary Survey and Framework for Design and Evaluation of Explainable AI Systems
Mohseni, S., Zarei, N., & Ragan, E. D. (2021) · ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1145/3387166 · Cited by 785
Longo, L., Brcic, M., Cabitza, F., Choi, J., Confalonieri, R., Ser, J. D., Guidotti, R., Hayashi, Y., Herrera, F., Holzinger, A., et al. (2024) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2024.102301 · Cited by 626
Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practices
Li, B., Qi, P., Liu, B., Di, S., Liu, J., Pei, J., Yi, J., & Zhou, B. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3555803 · Cited by 612
“Although the definition of the explainability of an AI model is still an open question, research has sought to address this problem from the perspectives of AI [141, 285] and psychology [144, 245].”
BackgroundArtificial intelligence in business: State of the art and future research agenda
Loureiro, S. M. C., Guerreiro, J., & Tussyadiah, I. P. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.001 · Cited by 682
Opening the black box: the promise and limitations of explainable machine learning in cardiology
Petch, J., Di, S., & Nelson, W. (2022) · Canadian Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2021.09.004 · Cited by 552
Artificial intelligence and knowledge sharing: Contributing factors to organizational performance
Olan, F., Arakpogun, E. O., Suklan, J., Nakpodia, F., Damij, N., & Jayawickrama, U. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.008 · Cited by 636
Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequisites, Causes and Goals of Human Trust in AI
Jacovi, A., Marasović, A., Miller, T., & Goldberg, Y. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445923 · Cited by 545
Self-citationInterpretability of machine learning-based prediction models in healthcare
Stiglic, G., Kocbek, P., Fijacko, N., Zitnik, M., Verbert, K., & Cilar, L. (2020) · WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1002/widm.1379 · Cited by 541
Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systems
Ehsan, U., Liao, Q. V., Muller, M., Riedl, M. O., & Weisz, J. D. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445188 · Cited by 538
Explainable AI for Healthcare 5.0: Opportunities and Challenges
Saraswat, D., Bhattacharya, P., Verma, A., Prasad, V. K., Tanwar, S., Sharma, G., Bokoro, P. N., & Sharma, R. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3197671 · Cited by 609
Artificial Intelligence and Marketing: Pitfalls and Opportunities
Bruyn, A. D., Viswanathan, V., Beh, Y. S., Brock, J. K., & von Wangenheim, F. (2020) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2020.04.007 · Cited by 647
Explainable machine learning in materials science
Zhong, X., Gallagher, B. J., Liu, S., Kailkhura, B., Hiszpanski, A. M., & Han, T. Y.-J. (2022) · npj Computational Materials · doi:10.1038/s41524-022-00884-7 · Cited by 566
Metrics for explainable AI: challenges and prospects
Hoffman, R. R., Mueller, S. T., Klein, G., & Litman, J. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1812.04608 · Cited by 518
A Review of Deep Learning Models for Time Series Prediction
Han, Z., Zhao, J., Leung, H., Ma, K. F., & Wang, W. (2019) · IEEE Sensors Journal · doi:10.1109/jsen.2019.2923982 · Cited by 537
Interpretable deep learning: interpretation, interpretability, trustworthiness, and beyond
Li, X., Xiong, H., Li, X., Wu, X., Zhang, X., Liu, J., Bian, J., & Dou, D. (2022) · Knowledge and Information Systems · doi:10.1007/s10115-022-01756-8 · Cited by 579
Opportunities and Challenges in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): A Survey
Das, A., & Rad, P. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.11371 · Cited by 504
Six Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence Grand Challenges
Ozmen Garibay, O., Winslow, B., Andolina, S., Antona, M., Bodenschatz, A., Coursaris, C., Falco, G., Fiore, S. M., Garibay, I., Grieman, K., et al. (2023) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2022.2153320 · Cited by 501
de Hond, A. A. H., Leeuwenberg, A. M., Hooft, L., Kant, I. M. J., Nijman, S. W. J., van Os, H. J. A., Aardoom, J. J., Debray, T. P. A., Schuit, E., van Smeden, M., et al. (2022) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-021-00549-7 · Cited by 499
Explaining anomalies detected by autoencoders using Shapley Additive Explanations
Antwarg, L., Miller, R. M., Shapira, B., & Rokach, L. (2021) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115736 · Cited by 496
Accountability in artificial intelligence: what it is and how it works
Novelli, C., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2024) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-023-01635-y · Cited by 495
“An explainable AIs does not report all available information, but only those conductive to contextual explanations, i.e., compared to counterfactual cases and relevant to the interaction between the agent and the forum (Miller 2019).”
Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking
Guidotti, R. (2022) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-022-00831-6 · Cited by 583
Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Models
Weidinger, L., Mellor, J., Rauh, M., Griffin, C., Uesato, J., Huang, P.-S., Cheng, M., Glaese, M., Balle, B., Kasirzadeh, A., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2112.04359 · Cited by 477
Coeckelbergh, M. (2020) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-019-00146-8 · Cited by 475
Opening the black box: interpretable machine learning for geneticists
Azodi, C. B., Tang, J., & Shiu, S.-H. (2020) · Trends in Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.tig.2020.03.005 · Cited by 473
Algorithms as work designers: How algorithmic management influences the design of jobs
Parent-Rocheleau, X., & Parker, S. K. (2022) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100838 · Cited by 512
Transparency in artificial intelligence
Larsson, S., & Heintz, F. (2020) · Internet Policy Review · doi:10.14763/2020.2.1469 · Cited by 458
Explainable Deep Learning: A Field Guide for the Uninitiated
Ras, G., Xie, N., van Gerven, M. A. J., & Doran, D. (2022) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.13200 · Cited by 551
Felzmann, H., Fosch‐Villaronga, E., Lutz, C., & Tamò‐Larrieux, A. (2019) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/2053951719860542 · Cited by 532
Interpretable XGBoost-SHAP Machine-Learning Model for Shear Strength Prediction of Squat RC Walls
Feng, D., Wang, W., Mangalathu, S., & Taciroğlu, E. (2021) · Journal of Structural Engineering · doi:10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0003115 · Cited by 457
Cheong, B. C. (2024) · Frontiers in Human Dynamics · doi:10.3389/fhumd.2024.1421273 · Cited by 445
Exploring students' perspectives on generative AI-assisted academic writing
Kim, J., Yu, S., Detrick, R., & Li, N. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12878-7 · Cited by 438
Interpretable and Explainable Machine Learning for Materials Science and Chemistry
Oviedo, F., Ferres, J. L., Buonassisi, T., & Butler, K. T. (2022) · Accounts of Materials Research · doi:10.1021/accountsmr.1c00244 · Cited by 435
Transparency in Algorithmic and Human Decision-Making: Is There a Double Standard?
Zerilli, J., Knott, A., Maclaurin, J., & Gavaghan, C. (2019) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-018-0330-6 · Cited by 420
Explainable artificial intelligence: Objectives, stakeholders, and future research opportunities
Meske, C., Bunde, E., Schneider, J., & Gersch, M. (2022) · Information Systems Management · doi:10.1080/10580530.2020.1849465 · Cited by 365
A Comprehensive Survey on Automatic Knowledge Graph Construction
Zhong, L., Wu, J. X., Li, Q., Peng, H., & Wu, X. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3618295 · Cited by 494
Evaluating XAI: A comparison of rule-based and example-based explanations
van der Waa, J., Nieuwburg, E., Cremers, A., & Neerincx, M. (2021) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2020.103404 · Cited by 393
Deep learning in drug discovery: an integrative review and future challenges
Askr, H., Elgeldawi, E., Ella, H. A., Elshaier, Y. A. M. M., Gomaa, M. M., & Hassanien, A. E. (2022) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-022-10306-1 · Cited by 428
A historical perspective of explainable Artificial Intelligence
Confalonieri, R., Çoba, L., Wagner, B., & Besold, T. R. (2020) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1002/widm.1391 · Cited by 431
Deterministic Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations for Stable Explainability
Zafar, M. R., & Khan, N. (2021) · Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction · doi:10.3390/make3030027 · Cited by 432
Stepin, I., Alonso, J. M., Catala, A., & Pereira-Farina, M. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3051315 · Cited by 376
Explainable, trustworthy, and ethical machine learning for healthcare: A survey
Rasheed, K., Qayyum, A., Ghaly, M., Al-Fuqaha, A., Razi, A., & Qadir, J. (2022) · Computers in Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.106043 · Cited by 372
Explanations Can Reduce Overreliance on AI Systems During Decision-Making
Vasconcelos, H., Jörke, M., Grunde-McLaughlin, M., Gerstenberg, T., Bernstein, M. S., & Krishna, R. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3579605 · Cited by 402
“The explanations we created for this work, much like similar work in XAI, are local explanations in a decision-making context [69].”
BackgroundA Review of Taxonomies of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) Methods
Speith, T. (2022) · ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) · doi:10.1145/3531146.3534639 · Cited by 424
Yu, H., & Guo, Y. (2023) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2023.1183162 · Cited by 357
Explanations in Autonomous Driving: A Survey
Omeiza, D., Webb, H., Jirotka, M., & Kunze, L. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · doi:10.1109/tits.2021.3122865 · Cited by 355
Deep Learning for Medical Image-Based Cancer Diagnosis
Jiang, X., Hu, Z., Wang, S., & Zhang, Y. (2023) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers15143608 · Cited by 409
Factual and Counterfactual Explanations for Black Box Decision Making
Guidotti, R., Monreale, A., Giannotti, F., Pedreschi, D., Ruggieri, S., & Turini, F. (2019) · IEEE Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1109/mis.2019.2957223 · Cited by 349
Shapley additive explanations for NO2 forecasting
Vega García, M., & Aznarte, J. L. (2020) · Ecological Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ecoinf.2019.101039 · Cited by 346
Schwalbe, G., & Finzel, B. (2023) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-022-00867-8 · Cited by 422
Langer, M., & Landers, R. N. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106878 · Cited by 338
Metadata
- Authors
- Miller, T.
- Affiliations
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Miller, Tim
- ORCID
- Miller, Tim
- Venue
- Artificial Intelligence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-02
- Volume
- 267
- Pages
- 1-38
- ISSN
- 0004-3702 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2670253439
- Cited by
- 5,302
- References
- 173
- Citations by year
- 2026: 848 · 2025: 855 · 2024: 765 · 2023: 788 · 2022: 673 · 2021: 690 · 2020: 413 · 2019: 212
- FWCI
- 192.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/ (vor, 1461 d)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-017 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-037 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-012 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-029 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-004 (stm-asf)
- Locations
- Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council (DP160104083)
- Defence Science and Technology Group
- Defence Science Institute
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
- Keywords
- explainable AI, human explanations, cognitive biases, social expectations, explanation evaluation, explanation generation, philosophy of explanation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
