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
“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]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe 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
“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
Items 601–700 of 1,050
Explainable AI lacks regulative reasons: why AI and human decision-making are not equally opaque
Peters, U. (2022) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-022-00217-w · Cited by 78
Deng, J., Chen, X., Jiang, R., Yin, D., Yang, Y., Song, X., & Tsang, I. W.-H. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2024.3371931 · Cited by 73
Guerrero, J. P., Nguewa, P., & García‐Sosa, A. T. (2021) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Computational Molecular Science · doi:10.1002/wcms.1513 · Cited by 63
Fintz, M., Osadchy, M., & Hertz, U. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-08863-0 · Cited by 68
Malhotra, A., & Jindal, R. (2023) · Cognitive Systems Research · doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2023.101186 · Cited by 72
Machine learning explainability via microaggregation and shallow decision trees
Blanco-Justicia, A., Domingo‐Ferrer, J., Mart́ınez, S., & Sánchez, D. (2020) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105532 · Cited by 61
Explainable machine learning for project management control
Santos, J. I., Pereda, M., Ahedo, V., & Galán, J. M. (2023) · Computers & Industrial Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.cie.2023.109261 · Cited by 89
Zhou, C., Xie, Y., Wang, W., & Zheng, Y. (2023) · Engineering Structures · doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116539 · Cited by 61
A user-centered explainable artificial intelligence approach for financial fraud detection
Zhou, Y. J., Li, H., Xiao, Z., & Qiu, J. L. (2023) · Finance research letters · doi:10.1016/j.frl.2023.104309 · Cited by 61
Algorithmic Harm in Consumer Markets
Bar‐Gill, O., Sunstein, C. R., & Talgam-Cohen, I. (2023) · The Journal of Legal Analysis · doi:10.1093/jla/laad003 · Cited by 69
Rationalization for explainable NLP: a survey
Gurrapu, S., Kulkarni, A., Huang, L., Lourentzou, I., & Batarseh, F. A. (2023) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2023.1225093 · Cited by 79
Wang, D., Bian, C., & Chen, G. (2024) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13466 · Cited by 77
Beyond self-diagnosis: how a chatbot-based symptom checker should respond
You, Y., Tsai, C.-H., Li, Y., Ma, F., Heron, C., & Gui, X. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3589959 · Cited by 60
Liao, Q. V., Zhang, Y., Luss, R., Doshi-Velez, F., & Dhurandhar, A. (2022) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing · doi:10.1609/hcomp.v10i1.21995 · Cited by 69
Interpretability of Machine Learning Solutions in Public Healthcare: The CRISP-ML Approach
Kolyshkina, I., & Simoff, S. (2021) · Frontiers in Big Data · doi:10.3389/fdata.2021.660206 · Cited by 60
“The study related to interpretability is scattered throughout a number of disciplines, such as AI, ML, human-computer interaction (HCI), visualization, cognition, and social sciences (Miller, 2019), to name a few of the areas.”
BackgroundA Grounded Interaction Protocol for Explainable Artificial Intelligence
Madumal, P., Miller, T., Sonenberg, L., & Vetere, F. (2019) · Adaptive Agents and Multi-Agents Systems · doi:10.65109/dgmp4001 · Cited by 60
Self-citationTo Test Machine Comprehension, Start by Defining Comprehension
Dunietz, J., Burnham, G., Bharadwaj, A., Rambow, O., Chu‐Carroll, J., & Ferrucci, D. (2020) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.701 · Cited by 68
Survey of Explainable Machine Learning with Visual and Granular Methods Beyond Quasi-Explanations
Kovalerchuk, B., Ahmad, M. A., & Teredesai, A. M. (2021) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-64949-4_8 · Cited by 63
The quest of parsimonious XAI: A human-agent architecture for explanation formulation
Mualla, Y., Tchappi, I., Kampik, T., Najjar, A., Calvaresi, D., Abbas‐Turki, A., Galland, S., & Nicolle, C. (2021) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2021.103573 · Cited by 66
Liu, N., Philip Shapira, A., Yue, X., & Guan, J. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0262050 · Cited by 60
Stakeholder Perceptions of the Safety and Assurance of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Sujan, M. A., White, S., Habli, I., & Reynolds, N. (2022) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105870 · Cited by 65
Quantifying the impact of AI recommendations with explanations on prescription decision making
Nagendran, M., Festor, P., Komorowski, M., Gordon, A. C., & Faisal, A. A. (2023) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00955-z · Cited by 60
On reading and interpreting black box deep neural networks
Dobson, J. E. (2023) · International Journal of Digital Humanities · doi:10.1007/s42803-023-00075-w · Cited by 80
A brief history of artificial intelligence embryo selection: from black-box to glass-box
Lee, T., Natalwala, J., Chapple, V., & Liu, Y. (2023) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/dead254 · Cited by 65
Hadweh, P., Niset, A., Salvagno, M., Barajraji, M. A., Hadwe, S. E., Taccone, F. S., & Barrit, S. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm14124026 · Cited by 72
GNN Explainer: A Tool for Post-hoc Explanation of Graph Neural NetworksPreprint
Ying, R., Bourgeois, D., You, J., Žitnik, M., & Leskovec, J. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 68
Interpretable generalized additive neural networks
Kraus, M., Tschernutter, D., Weinzierl, S., & Zschech, P. (2024) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2023.06.032 · Cited by 59
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
(2019) · Research Library Issues · doi:10.29242/rli.299 · Cited by 59
Yang, J., Amrollahi, A., & Marrone, M. (2024) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2024.101864 · Cited by 59
Enriching Visual with Verbal Explanations for Relational Concepts – Combining LIME with Aleph
Rabold, J., Deininger, H., Siebers, M., & Schmid, U. (2020) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-43823-4_16 · Cited by 63
Explainable reinforcement learning for broad-XAI: a conceptual framework and survey
Dazeley, R., Vamplew, P. W., & Cruz, F. (2023) · Neural Computing and Applications · doi:10.1007/s00521-023-08423-1 · Cited by 91
Some critical and ethical perspectives on the empirical turn of AI interpretability
John-Mathews, J.-M. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121209 · Cited by 67
On Tackling Explanation Redundancy in Decision Trees
Izza, Y., Ignatiev, A., & Marques-Silva, J. P. (2022) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.13575 · Cited by 74
Bujold, A., Parent‐Rocheleau, X., & Gaudet, M. (2022) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100245 · Cited by 76
Xu, W., & Gao, Z. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society · doi:10.1109/tts.2024.3486254 · Cited by 93
Explainable Reinforcement Learning through a Causal Lens
Madumal, P., Miller, T., Sonenberg, L., & Vetere, F. (2020) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i03.5631 · Cited by 58
Self-citationThe Intriguing Relation Between Counterfactual Explanations and Adversarial Examples
Freiesleben, T. (2021) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-021-09580-9 · Cited by 76
Philosophy of science at sea: Clarifying the interpretability of machine learning
Beisbart, C., & Räz, T. (2022) · Philosophy Compass · doi:10.1111/phc3.12830 · Cited by 66
Bertrand, A., Viard, T., Belloum, R., Eagan, J. R., & Maxwell, W. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581314 · Cited by 71
Domain adaptation in small-scale and heterogeneous biological datasets
Orouji, S., Liu, M. C., Korem, T., & Peters, M. A. K. (2024) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adp6040 · Cited by 61
Richards, D., & Dignum, V. (2019) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12863 · Cited by 63
How model accuracy and explanation fidelity influence user trustPreprint
Papenmeier, A., Englebienne, G., & Seifert, C. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.12652 · Cited by 139
Teaching Explainable Artificial Intelligence to High School Students
Alonso, J. M. (2020) · International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems · doi:10.2991/ijcis.d.200715.003 · Cited by 57
Community-in-the-loop: towards pluralistic value creation in AI, or—why AI needs business ethics
Häußermann, J. J., & Lütge, C. (2021) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-021-00047-2 · Cited by 64
A Multi-Component Framework for the Analysis and Design of Explainable Artificial Intelligence
Kim, M., Atakishiyev, S., Babiker, H. K. B., Farruque, N., Goebel, R. G., Zai͏̈ane, O. R., Motallebi, M.-H., Rabelo, J. C. B., Syed, T. I., Yao, H., et al. (2021) · Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction · doi:10.3390/make3040045 · Cited by 70
The Conflict Between Explainable and Accountable Decision-Making Algorithms
Lima, G., Grgić-Hlača, N., Jeong, J. K., & Cha, M. (2022) · ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) · doi:10.1145/3531146.3534628 · Cited by 77
Predicting the future of neuroimaging predictive models in mental health
Tejavibulya, L., Rolison, M. J., Gao, S., Liang, Q., Peterson, H., Dadashkarimi, J., Farruggia, M. C., Hahn, C. A., Noble, S., Lichenstein, S. D., et al. (2022) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41380-022-01635-2 · Cited by 58
A new approach based on association rules to add explainability to time series forecasting models
Troncoso-García, A. R., Martínez-Ballesteros, M., Alvarez, F. M., & Troncoso, A. (2023) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2023.01.021 · Cited by 61
Kinney, M. A., Anastasiadou, M., Naranjo-Zolotov, M., & Santos, V. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28562 · Cited by 45
On quantitative aspects of model interpretabilityPreprint
Nguyen, A.-P., & Martínez, M. R. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.07584 · Cited by 140
Mediating Community-AI Interaction through Situated Explanation
Kou, Y., & Gui, X. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3415173 · Cited by 61
Unraveling ML Models of Emotion With NOVA: Multi-Level Explainable AI for Non-Experts
Heimerl, A., Weitz, K., Baur, T., & André, E. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing · doi:10.1109/taffc.2020.3043603 · Cited by 64
Scheda, R., & Diciotti, S. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12136681 · Cited by 60
The public perceptions of algorithmic decision-making systems: Results from a large-scale survey
Aysolmaz, B., Müller, R., & Meacham, D. (2023) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2023.101954 · Cited by 56
Rapp, A., & Boldi, A. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3603497 · Cited by 57
Adversarial Robustness on In- and Out-Distribution Improves Explainability
Augustin, M., Meinke, A., & Hein, M. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-58574-7_14 · Cited by 62
Teach Me to Explain: A Review of Datasets for Explainable NLP.Preprint
Wiegreffe, S., & Marasović, A. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 57
The need to move away from agential-AI: Empirical investigations, useful concepts and open issues
Cabitza, F., Campagner, A., & Simone, C. (2021) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102696 · Cited by 55
Woodcock, C., Mittelstadt, B., Busbridge, D., & Blank, G. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/29386 · Cited by 59
Abdar, M., Khosravi, A., Islam, S. M. S., Acharya, U. R., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2022) · IEEE Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Magazine · doi:10.1109/msmc.2022.3150144 · Cited by 55
Robustness, Stability, and Fidelity of Explanations for a Deep Skin Cancer Classification Model
Saarela, M., & Geogieva, L. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12199545 · Cited by 60
A review of explainable AI in the satellite data, deep machine learning, and human poverty domain
Hall, O., Ohlsson, M., & Rognvaldsson, T. S. (2022) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2022.100600 · Cited by 70
Phan, M., Caigny, A. D., & Coussement, K. (2023) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2023.113940 · Cited by 75
Machine Learning Explainability Through Comprehensible Decision Trees
Blanco-Justicia, A., & Domingo‐Ferrer, J. (2019) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-29726-8_2 · Cited by 55
Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Human-Centric Data Analysis in Virtual Learning Environments
Alonso, J. M., & Casalino, G. (2019) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-31284-8_10 · Cited by 55
Effects of a Social Robot's Self-Explanations on How Humans Understand and Evaluate Its Behavior
Stange, S., & Kopp, S. (2020) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1145/3319502.3374802 · Cited by 57
Exploring the effects of human-centered AI explanations on trust and reliance
Scharowski, N., Perrig, S. A. C., Svab, M., Opwis, K., & Brühlmann, F. (2023) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2023.1151150 · Cited by 57
Banovic, N., Yang, Z., Ramesh, A., & Liu, A. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3579460 · Cited by 55
Fok, R., & Weld, D. S. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.07722 · Cited by 54
XAI Handbook: Towards a Unified Framework for Explainable AI
Palacio, S., Lucieri, A., Munir, M., Ahmed, S., Hees, J., & Dengel, A. R. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops · doi:10.1109/iccvw54120.2021.00420 · Cited by 60
VBridge: Connecting the Dots Between Features and Data to Explain Healthcare Models
Cheng, F., Liu, D., Du, F., Lin, Y., Zytek, A., Li, H., Qu, H., & Veeramachaneni, K. K. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2021.3114836 · Cited by 65
Cossette‐Lefebvre, H., & Maclure, J. (2022) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-022-00233-w · Cited by 54
Harm to Nonhuman Animals from AI: a Systematic Account and Framework
Coghlan, S., & Parker, C. (2023) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-023-00627-6 · Cited by 62
Exploring Evaluation Methods for Interpretable Machine Learning: A Survey
Alangari, N., Menaï, M. E. B., Mathkour, H. I., & Almosallam, I. A. (2023) · Information · doi:10.3390/info14080469 · Cited by 72
Gaczek, P., Leszczyński, G., & Mouakher, A. (2023) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.09.007 · Cited by 68
Liu, Y., Liu, C., Zheng, J., Xu, C., & Wang, D. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/73374 · Cited by 72
Explaining Explanation, Part 4: A Deep Dive on Deep Nets
Hoffman, R. R., Miller, T., Mueller, S. T., Klein, G. A., & Clancey, W. J. (2018) · IEEE Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1109/mis.2018.033001421 · Cited by 57
Self-citationden Homberg, M. J. C. V., Gevaert, C. M., & Georgiadou, Y. (2020) · Politics and Governance · doi:10.17645/pag.v8i4.3158 · Cited by 57
A Hierarchy of Limitations in Machine LearningPreprint
Malik, M. M. (2020) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2002.05193 · Cited by 116
Shen, H., Jin, H., Cabrera, Á. A., Perer, A., Zhu, H., & Hong, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3415224 · Cited by 60
Tufan, E., Tezcan, C., & Acartürk, C. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3068961 · Cited by 53
Prompting Contrastive Explanations for Commonsense Reasoning Tasks
Paranjape, B., Michael, J., Ghazvininejad, M., Hajishirzi, H., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.366 · Cited by 64
On Explaining Random Forests with SAT
Izza, Y., & Marques-Silva, J. P. (2021) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2021/356 · Cited by 53
Defining Explanation and Explanatory Depth in XAI
Buijsman, S. (2022) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-022-09607-9 · Cited by 58
Explainable AI framework for reliable and transparent automated energy management in buildings
Teixeira, B., Carvalhais, L., Pinto, T. D. O., & Vale, Z. (2025) · Energy and Buildings · doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2025.116246 · Cited by 77
Local and global explanations of agent behavior: Integrating strategy summaries with saliency maps
Huber, T., Weitz, K., André, E., & Amir, O. (2021) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2021.103571 · Cited by 53
Explainable Sentiment Analysis with Applications in Medicine
Zucco, C., Liang, H., Fatta, G. D., & Cannataro, M. (2018) · 2018 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM) · doi:10.1109/bibm.2018.8621359 · Cited by 59
Bock, K. W. D., & Caigny, A. D. (2021) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2021.113523 · Cited by 54
Langer, M., Baum, K. L., König, C. J., Hähne, V., Oster, D., & Speith, T. (2021) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.12325 · Cited by 66
Explaining Recommendations in E-Learning: Effects on Adolescents' Trust
Ooge, J., Kato, S., & Verbert, K. (2022) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3490099.3511140 · Cited by 63
Ayoub, O., Troìa, S., Andreoletti, D., Bianco, A. G., Tornatore, M., Giordano, S., & Rottondi, C. (2022) · Journal of Optical Communications and Networking · doi:10.1364/jocn.470812 · Cited by 56
El–Sappagh, S., Alonso, J. M., Abuhmed, T., Ali, F., & Bugarín, A. (2023) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-023-10415-5 · Cited by 58
Kotobi, A., Singh, K., Höche, D., Bari, S., Meißner, R. H., & Bande, A. (2023) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.3c07513 · Cited by 53
Automated Rationale Generation: A Technique for Explainable AI and its Effects on Human PerceptionsPreprint
Ehsan, U., Tambwekar, P., Chan, L., Harrison, B. E., & Riedl, M. O. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1901.03729 · Cited by 52
AI Trust: Can Explainable AI Enhance Warranted Trust?
de Brito Duarte, R., Correia, F., Arriaga, P., & Paiva, A. (2023) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1155/2023/4637678 · Cited by 52
Human-Swarm-Teaming Transparency and Trust Architecture
Hepworth, A., Baxter, D. P., Hussein, A., Yaxley, K. J., Debie, E., & Abbass, H. A. (2020) · IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica · doi:10.1109/jas.2020.1003545 · Cited by 57
(2021) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.conll-1.15 · Cited by 51
Foundations of explanations as model reconciliation
Sreedharan, S., Chakraborti, T., & Subbarao Kambhampati, B. (2021) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2021.103558 · Cited by 55
Schoonderwoerd, T., van Zoelen, E. M., den Bosch, K. V., & Neerincx, M. A. (2022) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102831 · Cited by 51
Towards Explainability for AI Fairness
Zhou, J. J., Chen, F., & Holzinger, A. (2022) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-04083-2_18 · Cited by 56
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
