The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
Open accessAbstract
Black box machine learning models are currently being used for high stakes decision-making throughout society, causing problems throughout healthcare, criminal justice, and in other domains. People have hoped that creating methods for explaining these black box models will alleviate some of these problems, but trying to explain black box models, rather than creating models that are interpretable in the first place, is likely to perpetuate bad practices and can potentially cause catastrophic harm to society. There is a way forward - it is to design models that are inherently interpretable. This manuscript clarifies the chasm between explaining black boxes and using inherently interpretable models, outlines several key reasons why explainable black boxes should be avoided in high-stakes decisions, identifies challenges to interpretable machine learning, and provides several example applications where interpretable models could potentially replace black box models in criminal justice, healthcare, and computer vision.
Overview
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 cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“A central challenge in this domain is navigating the well-documented trade-off between model accuracy and inherent interpretability [6].”
From Explainable AI for Clinical Decision Support Systems: Literature Review, Key Gaps, and Research Synthesis (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“However, this remarkable capability comes with a fundamental trade-off: as models become more powerful, they simultaneously become more opaque, creating what researchers term the interpretability–performance paradox [5].”
From Beyond Post hoc Explanations: A Comprehensive Framework for Accountable AI in Medical Imaging Through Transparency, Interpretability, and Explainability (2025) · cites this paper as [5]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
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
“Rudin takes this further, saying that post-hoc explanations “must be wrong”; that they are by definition not completely faithful to the original model and must be less accurate with respect to the primary task.”
From The false hope of current approaches to explainable artificial intelligence in health care (2021) · cites this paper as [35]
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, this work has demonstrated that simple interpretable models (with two and respectively three features) can perform as well as the widely used criminal justice COMPAS algorithm, which instead draws on 137 features.”
From Accountable Artificial Intelligence: Holding Algorithms to Account (2021) · cites this paper as Rudin 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
“While Artificial Intelligence (AI) promises significant enhancements for Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs), the opacity of many AI models remains a major barrier to clinical adoption, primarily due to interpretability and trust challenges.”
From Explainable AI for Clinical Decision Support Systems: Literature Review, Key Gaps, and Research Synthesis (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
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
“However, as with cognitive offloading, there is a potential risk that over-reliance on AI for decision-making could diminish human capacity for critical thinking (Rudin, 2019).”
From The impact of digital technology, social media, and artificial intelligence on cognitive functions: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Rudin, 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
“Many research groups have tackled early prediction of AKI using electronic health records (EHR) data [8–11], but no model so far explains the rationale behind specific predictions despite a clear need for explainable and actionable predictions [6, 12].”
From Machine learning model for early prediction of acute kidney injury (AKI) in pediatric critical care (2021) · 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
“This goes against the move towards transparency and open science, and makes it hard to uncover the origin of, or gaps in, chatbots' knowledge 10 .”
From ChatGPT: five priorities for research (2023) · cites this paper as [10]
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
“As users of these systems have grown beyond ML experts and the research community, the need to better interpret and understand them has grown as well, particularly in the context of high-stakes decisions that affect individuals ' health or wellbeing (Lakkaraju et al., 2016; Lipton, 2018; Rudin, 2019).”
From Explainable machine learning for public policy: Use cases, gaps, and research directions (2023) · cites this paper as Rudin, 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
“Against this background, research into explainability/interpretability 1 of ML models has experienced rapid expansion and innovation in recent years, with a focus on method development.”
From Explainable machine learning for public policy: Use cases, gaps, and research directions (2023) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“XAI often is a technique used to support methods, and keywords are often not mentioned in the title or body of papers (Rudin (2019)).”
From Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in deep learning-based medical image analysis (2022) · cites this paper as Rudin (2019)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Black-box models, despite their high predictive performance, often lack the necessary transparency [76].”
From Deepfake Media Forensics: Status and Future Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as [76]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“While “black‐box” algorithms raise complex opaqueness and interpretability challenges, simpler interpretable ML algorithms do not, but have generally also been regarded as less powerful (Guidotti et al. 2019; see however, Rudin 2019).”
From Accountable Artificial Intelligence: Holding Algorithms to Account (2021) · cites this paper as Rudin 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Rudin [6], for example, argues that opaque models should be avoided in high-stakes settings such as medicine, where interpretability and trustworthiness are at least as important as predictive accuracy.”
From Explainable AI for Clinical Decision Support Systems: Literature Review, Key Gaps, and Research Synthesis (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, it is important to note that this trade-off does not always occur, in which case a more interpretable model is generally preferred (i.e. explainable modelling) [76].”
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“a substantial computer science literature now advocates either post hoc explanation techniques or the outright substitution of interpretable models in high-stakes settings (Rudin, 2019).”
From Auditing the Black Box: Rethinking Audit Assurance and Professional Liability in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (2026) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Interpretability is therefore not a stylistic preference in forensic work but a condition of testimonial usefulness, which is an applied vindication of Rudin's (2019) argument for interpretable models in high-stakes settings.”
From Auditing the Black Box: Rethinking Audit Assurance and Professional Liability in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (2026) · cites this paper as Rudin's (2019)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“As perfectly stated in [347], it is not necessarily true that models that are more complex are inherently more accurate.”
From Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI (2020) · cites this paper as [347]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“What is more, even when applicable, the legal requirements are ambiguous as to what is required (i.e., “meaningful information about the logic involved”) and risk compromising the value that can be derived from this information: “Because the definition of what constitutes a viable explanation is unclear, even strong regulations such as “right to explanation” can be undermined with less‐than‐satisf”
From Accountable Artificial Intelligence: Holding Algorithms to Account (2021) · cites this paper as Rudin 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Inherently therefore, explanation models are not fully faithful representations of the original model, but are rather “approximations” thereof, which necessarily simultaneously reduces their explanatory potential (Rudin 2019).”
From Accountable Artificial Intelligence: Holding Algorithms to Account (2021) · cites this paper as Rudin 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“First, modern AI systems are often black-box models for which humans cannot see how or why the model made a prediction [54].”
From Improving Human-AI Collaboration With Descriptions of AI Behavior (2023) · cites this paper as [54]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, post-hoc explanations are approximations to the underlying model rather than exact representations [65].”
From Toward generalizable and interpretable machine learning models in healthcare: Insights from ICU outcome predictions (2026) · cites this paper as [65]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The challenge remains to provide higher-level explainability that aligns with human cognitive processes [Rudin, 2019].”
From Authorship Attribution in the Era of LLMs: Problems, Methodologies, and Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Inherently interpretable ML models are designed such that an end user could understand its decisionmaking process (Lakkaraju et al., 2016; Rudin, 2019).”
From Explainable machine learning for public policy: Use cases, gaps, and research directions (2023) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Interpretable models often rely on carefully curated representations of data with meaningful input features (Rudin, 2019), often through discretization or binary encoding (Caruana et al., 2015; Lakkaraju et al., 2016; Ustun and Rudin, 2019).”
From Explainable machine learning for public policy: Use cases, gaps, and research directions (2023) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“as black-box ML models are often too complex to be explained entirely, post hoc methods typically derive an approximate explanation (Gilpin et al., 2018; Rudin, 2019), which makes ensuring the fidelity of the explanations to the model a key challenge in this work.”
From Explainable machine learning for public policy: Use cases, gaps, and research directions (2023) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“While largerscale evaluations are desirable, prior work (Rudin, 2019; Wiegreffe et al., 2021) has shown that even small samples, when selected for conceptual diversity and difficulty, yield robust insights into model behavior.”
From GIER: Gap-Driven Self-Refinement for Large Language Models (2025) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“With regards to methodology, explainability can either be an inherent characteristic of an algorithm or can be approximated by other methods [2].”
From Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: a multidisciplinary perspective (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“An important point to note here is that explainability has many facets and, unfortunately, the terminology of explainability is not well defined. Other terms such as interpretability and/or transparency are often used synonymously [2, 3].”
From Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: a multidisciplinary perspective (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“Importantly, however, inherent explainability will, in general, be more accurate than methods that only approximate explainability [2].”
From Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: a multidisciplinary perspective (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“While the work of Rudin et al. is important to raise attention to the shortcomings of approximating explainability methods, it is likely that some approximating methods, in contrast to the notion of [2], have value given the complex nature of explaining machine learning models.”
From Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: a multidisciplinary perspective (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
In the citing paper
“However, caution would be recommended since ML explainability can be inaccurate or non-meaningful due to the underlying mathematical assumptions13.”
From Mitigating bias in machine learning for medicine (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
In the citing paper
“The prototype networks are comparatively difficult to train than regular deep neural networks because of the scarcity of available techniques for their training [110].”
From Transparency of deep neural networks for medical image analysis: A review of interpretability methods (2022) · cites this paper as [110]
In the citing paper
“As the field is still in its infancy, there is no consensus on the definition of the terms interpretability and explainability in this context, and recently various definitions have been proposed for these terms [9,88,110].”
From Transparency of deep neural networks for medical image analysis: A review of interpretability methods (2022) · cites this paper as [110]
In the citing paper
“This can instill a false sense of confidence in the model which can be detrimental for troubleshooting and model deployment in clinical practice [110].”
From Transparency of deep neural networks for medical image analysis: A review of interpretability methods (2022) · cites this paper as [110]
In the citing paper
“Post-hoc interpretability methods are only approximations and do not accurately depict the correct model behavior and therefore compromise trust in the explanations [5,110].”
From Transparency of deep neural networks for medical image analysis: A review of interpretability methods (2022) · cites this paper as [110]
In the citing paper
“It depends on the researcher's ability to discover the patterns in an interpretable way while at the same time allowing for flexibility to fit the data accurately [110].”
From Transparency of deep neural networks for medical image analysis: A review of interpretability methods (2022) · cites this paper as [110]
In the citing paper
“For tabular data, SHAP values can rank the importance of different clinical factors and show whether a prognosis was driven primarily by tumor size, patient age, or biomarker status [162,163,164,165].”
From Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Oncology: From Productivity Enhancement to Creative Discovery (2025) · cites this paper as [162]
In the citing paper
“To this end, explainability is an often-cited challenge for”
From Artificial Intelligence in Oncology: Current Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions (2024) · cites this paper as [203]
In the citing paper
“Interpretable models use a small set of features with a low complexity of interaction between them.”
From Explainable AI is Dead, Long Live Explainable AI!: Hypothesis-driven Decision Support using Evaluative AI (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Rudin [33] argues that for high-stakes decisions, people should avoid using black-box models altogether, and instead should use interpretable models.”
From Explainable AI is Dead, Long Live Explainable AI!: Hypothesis-driven Decision Support using Evaluative AI (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Counterfactual explanations are normally considered contrastive by nature and therefore present a source of valuable complementary information to a given automatic prediction [52].”
From A Survey of Contrastive and Counterfactual Explanation Generation Methods for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
In the citing paper
“In this data-rich environment, tax administrations enjoy conditions that are very favourable to the use of AI technologies: 31 (i) the volume of data is so great that its direct examination is not feasible through human labour; 32 and (ii) the large amounts of data mean that any”
From Towards eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in Tax Law: The Need for a Minimum Legal Standard (2022) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“Lastly, the opacity of most current AI models is one of the most popular topics of contemporary AI research (Rudin 2019).”
From Trustworthy artificial intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as Rudin 2019
In the citing paper
“The literature supports this finding, emphasizing the importance of explainable AI in healthcare to ensure transparency and trustworthiness [30].”
From Leading with AI in critical care nursing: challenges, opportunities, and the human factor (2024) · cites this paper as [30]
In the citing paper
“The absence of any link to a factual knowledge source that can help LLMs reason on their generation introduce what is known as the “black box” effect (Rudin, 2019).”
From A review of the explainability and safety of conversational agents for mental health to identify avenues for improvement (2023) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
In the citing paper
“Such neglect of detail is necessary to provide explanations that are understandable for human agents, and, so the worry goes, there is a real risk that the omitted details are in fact crucial to the true causal story of how the decision was in fact produced”
From AI, Opacity, and Personal Autonomy (2022) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
In the citing paper
“Even with a multiscale model, the translation of genotype to phenotype can be complex, and the use of standard “black-box” machine learning algorithms prevents a straightforward biological interpretation (Rudin, 2019).”
From Mapping the multiscale structure of biological systems (2021) · cites this paper as Rudin, 2019
In the citing paper
“AI technology is widely known to be difficult to explain and understand; AI has long been criticized for inexplicable “black box algorithms,” and calls to demystify these algorithms have created an entire category of explainable AI [37,38].”
From Reimagining Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Undergraduate Medical Education in the Era of Artificial Intelligence (2023) · cites this paper as [38]
In the citing paper
“The reviewed studies suggest an inherent trade-off between model complexity, input representation, and explainability in clinical audio-based AI systems [32].”
From Explainable and Interpretable AI for Voice and Speech Analysis in Clinical Care: Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
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
Classification and Regression Trees.
Ryzin, J. V., Breiman, L., Friedman, J. H., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1986) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288003 · Cited by 21,030
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043158 · Cited by 17,812
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.2.343 · Cited by 17,563
Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networks
Ganin, Y., Ustinova, E., Ajakan, H., Germain, P., Larochelle, H., Laviolette, F., Marchand, M., & Lempitsky, V. (2017) · Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-58347-1_10 · Cited by 8,318
(1996) · Cited by 4,738
Definitions, methods, and applications in interpretable machine learning
Murdoch, W. J., Singh, C., Kumbier, K., Abbasi-Asl, R., & Yu, B. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1900654116 · Cited by 2,167
European Union Regulations on Algorithmic Decision Making and a “Right to Explanation”
Goodman, B., & Flaxman, S. (2017) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v38i3.2741 · Cited by 2,131
Very Simple Classification Rules Perform Well on Most Commonly Used Datasets
Holte, R. C. (1993) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1022631118932 · Cited by 1,800
Zech, J. R., Badgeley, M. A., Liu, M., Costa, A. B., Titano, J. J., & Oermann, E. K. (2018) · PLOS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002683 · Cited by 1,719 · cited 1×
“[34], who noticed that their neural network was picking up on the word “portable” within an x-ray image, representing the type of x-ray equipment rather than the medical content of the image.”
BackgroundThe Magical Mystery Four: How Is Working Memory Capacity Limited, and Why?
Cowan, N. (2010) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721409359277 · Cited by 1,255
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Kodratoff, Y. The comprehensibility manifesto. KDD Nugget Newsletter https://www.kdnuggets.com/news/94/n9.txt (1994).
- Quinlan, J. R. C4. 5: Programs for Machine Learning Vol. 1 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1993).
- Angelino, E., Larus-Stone, N., Alabi, D., Seltzer, M. & Rudin, C. Certifiably optimal rule lists for categorical data. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 19, 1–79 (2018).
- Hu, X. (S.), Rudin, C. & Seltzer, M. Optimal sparse decision trees. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.12847 (2019). · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 1,082
The Role of Machine Learning in the Understanding and Design of Materials
Moosavi, S. M., Jablonka, K. M., & Smit, B. (2020) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.0c09105 · Cited by 451
Interpretable machine learning for knowledge generation in heterogeneous catalysis
Esterhuizen, J. A., Goldsmith, B. R., & Linic, S. (2022) · Nature Catalysis · doi:10.1038/s41929-022-00744-z · Cited by 442
Esmaeilzadeh, P. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2024.102861 · Cited by 442
AI for life: Trends in artificial intelligence for biotechnology
Holzinger, A., Keiblinger, K., Holub, P., Zatloukal, K., & Müller, H. (2023) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2023.02.001 · Cited by 438
Rudin, C., & Radin, J. (2019) · Harvard Data Science Review · doi:10.1162/99608f92.5a8a3a3d · Cited by 432
Self-citationA 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
Schwalbe, G., & Finzel, B. (2023) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-022-00867-8 · Cited by 422
Interpretable scientific discovery with symbolic regression: a review
Makke, N., & Chawla, S. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-023-10622-0 · Cited by 422
Benchmarking and survey of explanation methods for black box models
Bodria, F., Giannotti, F., Guidotti, R., Naretto, F., Pedreschi, D., & Rinzivillo, S. (2023) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-023-00933-9 · Cited by 410
Thieme, A., Belgrave, D., & Doherty, G. (2020) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3398069 · Cited by 406
The Disagreement Problem in Explainable Machine Learning: A Practitioner's PerspectivePreprint
Krishna, S., Han, T., Gu, A., Jabbari, S., Wu, Z. S., & Lakkaraju, H. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2963888/v1 · Cited by 404
Privacy preservation in federated learning: An insightful survey from the GDPR perspective
Truong, N., Sun, K., Wang, S., Guitton, F., & Guo, Y. (2021) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2021.102402 · Cited by 399
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
Jiang, S., Zheng, Y., & SOLOMATINE, D. P. (2020) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2020gl088229 · Cited by 389
Stepin, I., Alonso, J. M., Catala, A., & Pereira-Farina, M. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3051315 · Cited by 376
“In addition, many of the existing eXplainable AI (XAI 1 ) methods provide summaries of automatically made predictions rather than true explanations [4].”
BackgroundMahbooba, B., Timilsina, M., Sahal, R., & Serrano, M. (2021) · Complexity · doi:10.1155/2021/6634811 · Cited by 375
Noor, M. B. T., Zenia, N. Z., Kaiser, M. S., Mamun, S. A., & Mahmud, M. (2020) · Brain Informatics · doi:10.1186/s40708-020-00112-2 · Cited by 374
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
Artificial intelligence in diagnostic pathology
Shafi, S., & Parwani, A. V. (2023) · Diagnostic Pathology · doi:10.1186/s13000-023-01375-z · Cited by 371
Machine learning directed drug formulation development
Bannigan, P., Aldeghi, M., Bao, Z., Häse, F., Aspuru‐Guzik, A., & Allen, C. J. (2021) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2021.05.016 · Cited by 366
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
Islam, M. R., Ahmed, M. U., Barua, S., & Begum, S. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12031353 · Cited by 366
Machine Learning for Social Science: An Agnostic Approach
Grimmer, J., Roberts, M. E., & Stewart, B. (2021) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-053119-015921 · Cited by 362
Tripathy, K. P., & Mishra, A. K. (2023) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130458 · Cited by 362
Yang, C., Chen, M., & Yuan, Q. (2021) · Accident Analysis & Prevention · doi:10.1016/j.aap.2021.106153 · Cited by 360
Attention, please! A survey of neural attention models in deep learning
Correia, A. D. S., & Colombini, E. L. (2022) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-022-10148-x · Cited by 365
Boehm, K. M., Aherne, E. A., Ellenson, L., Nikolovski, I., Alghamdi, M., Vázquez-García, I., Zamarin, D., Long Roche, K., Liu, Y., Patel, D., et al. (2022) · Nature Cancer · doi:10.1038/s43018-022-00388-9 · Cited by 357
Machine Learning and the Future of Cardiovascular Care
Quer, G., Arnaout, R., Henne, M., & Arnaout, R. (2021) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.030 · Cited by 353
Jabed, M. A., & Murad, M. A. A. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40836 · Cited by 347
Mersha, M. A., Lâm, K. N., Wood, J., AlShami, A. K., & Kalita, J. K. (2024) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2024.128111 · Cited by 346
Assessing the trustworthiness of saliency maps for localizing abnormalities in medical imaging
Arun, N., Gaw, N., Singh, P., Chang, K., Aggarwal, M., Chen, B., Hoebel, K., Gupta, S., Patel, J., Gidwani, M., et al. (2021) · Radiology: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1148/ryai.2021200267 · Cited by 342
Artificial Intelligence for Predictive Biomarker Discovery in Immuno-Oncology: A Systematic Review
Prelaj, A., Miskovic, V., Zanitti, M., Trovo, F., Genova, C., Viscardi, G., Rebuzzi, S. E., Mazzeo, L., Provenzano, L., Kosta, S., et al. (2024) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2023.10.125 · Cited by 340
Shaping the future of healthcare: ethical clinical challenges and pathways to trustworthy AI
Goktas, P., & Grzybowski, A. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm14051605 · Cited by 336
Payrovnaziri, S. N., Chen, Z., Rengifo‐Moreno, P., Miller, T., Bian, J., Chen, J. H., Liu, X., & He, Z. (2020) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa053 · Cited by 335
Video-based Facial Micro-Expression Analysis: A Survey of Datasets, Features and Algorithms
Ben, X., Ren, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, S., Kpalma, K., Meng, W., & Liu, Y. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2021.3067464 · Cited by 331
Neural circuit policies enabling auditable autonomy
Lechner, M., Hasani, R., Amini, A., Henzinger, T. A., Rus, D. L., & Grosu, R. (2020) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-020-00237-3 · Cited by 330
Boobier, S., Hose, D. R. J., Blacker, A. J., & Nguyen, B. N. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-19594-z · Cited by 326
Muhammad, D., & Bendechache, M. (2024) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2024.08.005 · Cited by 325
Machine learning for active matter
Cichos, F., Gustavsson, K., Mehlig, B., & Volpe, G. (2020) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-020-0146-9 · Cited by 323
Measuring the predictability of life outcomes with a scientific mass collaboration
Salganik, M. J., Lundberg, I., Kindel, A. T., Ahearn, C. E., Al-Ghoneim, K., Almaatouq, A., Altschul, D. M., Brand, J. E., Carnegie, N. B., Compton, R. J., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1915006117 · Cited by 322
Artificial Intelligence in Tactical Human Resource Management: A Systematic Literature Review
Votto, A. M., Valecha, R., Najafirad, P., & Rao, H. R. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management Data Insights · doi:10.1016/j.jjimei.2021.100047 · Cited by 322
Bottom-up Coarse-Graining: Principles and Perspectives
Jin, J., Pak, A. J., Durumeric, A. E. P., Loose, T. D., & Voth, G. A. (2022) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00643 · Cited by 321
Neural Additive Models: Interpretable Machine Learning with Neural NetsPreprint
Agarwal, R., Melnick, L., Frosst, N., Zhang, X., Lengerich, B. J., Caruana, R., & Hinton, G. E. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2004.13912 · Cited by 317
Concept whitening for interpretable image recognition
Chen, Z., Bei, Y., & Rudin, C. D. (2020) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-020-00265-z · Cited by 316
Self-citationExplainable Reinforcement Learning: A Survey
Puiutta, E., & Veith, E. M. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-57321-8_5 · Cited by 311
Weak SINDy for partial differential equations
Messenger, D. A., & Bortz, D. M. (2021) · Journal of Computational Physics · doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110525 · Cited by 309
Wang, D., Thunéll, S., Lindberg, U., Jiang, L., Trygg, J., & Tysklind, M. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113941 · Cited by 309
Towards neural Earth system modelling by integrating artificial intelligence in Earth system science
Irrgang, C., Boers, N., Sonnewald, M., Barnes, E. A., Kadow, C., Staneva, J., & Saynisch-Wagner, J. (2021) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-021-00374-3 · Cited by 308
Understanding artificial intelligence ethics and safetyPreprint
Leslie, D. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.05684 · Cited by 308
Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims
Brundage, M., Avin, S., Wang, J., Belfield, H., Krueger, G., Hadfield, G., Khlaaf, H., Yang, J., Toner, H., Fong, R., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2004.07213 · Cited by 306
“This lack of interpretability in AI systems has raised concerns about using AI models in high stakes decision-making contexts where human welfare may be compromised [73].”
BackgroundExplaining a series of models by propagating Shapley values
Chen, H., Lundberg, S., & Lee, S. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-31384-3 · Cited by 303
Survey on Explainable AI: From Approaches, Limitations and Applications Aspects
Yang, W., Wei, Y.-C., Wei, H., Chen, Y., Huang, G., Li, X., Li, R., Yao, N., Wang, X., Gu, X., et al. (2023) · Human-Centric Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1007/s44230-023-00038-y · Cited by 303
Chou, Y.-L., Moreira, C., Bruza, P., Ouyang, C., & Jorge, J. (2022) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2021.11.003 · Cited by 302
Trusting Automation: Designing for Responsivity and Resilience
Chiou, E. K., & Lee, J. D. (2023) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/00187208211009995 · Cited by 301
A Survey of Algorithmic Recourse: Contrastive Explanations and Consequential Recommendations
Karimi, A.-H., Barthe, G., Schölkopf, B., & Valera, I. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3527848 · Cited by 301
Chen, H., Gomez, C., Huang, C.-M., & Unberath, M. (2022) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-022-00699-2 · Cited by 300
Interpretable machine learning with an ensemble of gradient boosting machines
Konstantinov, A. V., & Utkin, L. V. (2021) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2021.106993 · Cited by 299
Artificial Intelligence in Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Research
Bhattamisra, S. K., Banerjee, P., Gupta, P., Mayuren, J., Patra, S., & Candasamy, M. (2023) · Big Data and Cognitive Computing · doi:10.3390/bdcc7010010 · Cited by 298
Avoiding common machine learning pitfalls
Lones, M. A. (2024) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2024.101046 · Cited by 298
Towards explainable deep neural networks (xDNN)
Angelov, P., & Soares, E. (2020) · Neural Networks · doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2020.07.010 · Cited by 292
Machine learning for hydrologic sciences: An introductory overview
Xu, T., & Liang, F. (2021) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water · doi:10.1002/wat2.1533 · Cited by 292
Shanmugasundaram, M., & Tamilarasu, A. (2023) · Frontiers in Cognition · doi:10.3389/fcogn.2023.1203077 · Cited by 291
Open Problems in Mechanistic Interpretability
Sharkey, L., Chughtai, B., Batson, J., Lindsey, J., Wu, J., Bushnaq, L., Goldowsky-Dill, N., Heimersheim, S., Ortega, A., Bloom, J., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.16496 · Cited by 291
Ghannam, R. B., & Techtmann, S. M. (2021) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2021.01.028 · Cited by 289
Topçuoğlu, B. D., Lesniak, N. A., Ruffin, M. T., Wiens, J., & Schloss, P. D. (2020) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.00434-20 · Cited by 295
Hyperparameter Tuning in Machine Learning: A Comprehensive Review
Ilemobayo, J. A., Durodola, O. I., Alade, O., Awotunde, O. J., Olanrewaju, A. T., Falana, O., Ogungbire, A., Osinuga, A., Ogunbiyi, D., Ifeanyi, A. O., et al. (2024) · Journal of Engineering Research and Reports · doi:10.9734/jerr/2024/v26i61188 · Cited by 284
Mirbabaie, M., Stieglitz, S., & Frick, N. (2021) · Health and Technology · doi:10.1007/s12553-021-00555-5 · Cited by 283
DOME: recommendations for supervised machine learning validation in biology
Walsh, I., Fishman, D., Garcia-Gasulla, D., Titma, T., Pollastri, G., ELIXIR Machine Learning Focus Group, Capriotti, E., Casadio, R., Capella-Gutierrez, S., Cirillo, D., et al. (2021) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-021-01205-4 · Cited by 282
Kiseleva, A., Kotzinos, D., & De Hert, P. (2022) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2022.879603 · Cited by 278
Towards Human-Centered Explainable AI: A Survey of User Studies for Model Explanations
Rong, Y., Leemann, T., Nguyen, T.-T., Fiedler, L., Qian, P., Unhelkar, V., Seidel, T., Kasneci, G., & Kasneci, E. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2023.3331846 · Cited by 278
Post-hoc Interpretability for Neural NLP: A Survey
Madsen, A., Reddy, S., & Chandar, S. (2022) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3546577 · Cited by 283
Interpretable Machine Learning
Boehmke, B., & Greenwell, B. (2019) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780367816377-16 · Cited by 276
Nemani, V. P., Biggio, L., Huan, X., Hu, Z. Y., Fink, O., Tran, A., Wang, Y., Zhang, X., & Hu, C. K. (2023) · Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing · doi:10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.110796 · Cited by 278
Algorithmic recourse: From counterfactual explanations to interventions
Karimi, A.-H., Schölkopf, B., & Valera, I. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445899 · Cited by 274
Joyce, D. W., Kormilitzin, A., Smith, K., & Cipriani, A. (2023) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00751-9 · Cited by 274
Interpretable and explainable AI (XAI) model for spatial drought prediction
Dikshit, A., & Pradhan, B. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149797 · Cited by 272
Benchmarking saliency methods for chest X-ray interpretation
Saporta, A., Gui, X., Agrawal, A., Pareek, A., Truong, S. Q. H., Nguyen, C. D. T., Ngo, V.-D., Seekins, J., Blankenberg, F. G., Ng, A. Y., et al. (2022) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00536-x · Cited by 270
Mitigating bias in machine learning for medicine
Vokinger, K. N., Feuerriegel, S., & Kesselheim, A. S. (2021) · Communications Medicine · doi:10.1038/s43856-021-00028-w · Cited by 269
Explainable Artificial Intelligence: a Systematic Review
Vilone, G., & Longo, L. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.00093 · Cited by 269
Neural Prototype Trees for Interpretable Fine-grained Image Recognition
Nauta, M., van Bree, R., & Seifert, C. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr46437.2021.01469 · Cited by 269
Wanner, J., Herm, L.-V., Heinrich, K., & Janiesch, C. (2022) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-022-00593-5 · Cited by 269
Ghaffarian, S., Taghikhah, F. R., & Maier, H. R. (2023) · International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction · doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.104123 · Cited by 269
One Explanation Does Not Fit All: A Toolkit and Taxonomy of AI Explainability Techniques
Arya, V., Bellamy, R. K. E., Chen, P.-Y., Dhurandhar, A., Hind, M., Hoffman, S. C., Houde, S., Liao, Q. V., Luss, R., Mojsilović, A., et al. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1909.03012 · Cited by 268
“2We use the terms explainable and interpretable fairly interchangeably; some scholars make a strong distinction [49].”
BackgroundImproved reconstruction of single-cell developmental potential with CytoTRACE 2
Kang, M., Armenteros, J. J. A., Gulati, G. S., Gleyzer, R., Avagyan, S., Brown, E. L., Zhang, W., Usmani, A., Earland, N. J., Wu, Z., et al. (2025) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-025-02857-2 · Cited by 292
Hooker, G., Mentch, L., & Zhou, S. (2021) · Statistics and Computing · doi:10.1007/s11222-021-10057-z · Cited by 264
Spatial flood susceptibility mapping using an explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) model
Pradhan, B., Lee, S., Dikshit, A., & Kim, H. (2023) · Geoscience Frontiers · doi:10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101625 · Cited by 264
Toe, C. Y., Tsounis, C., Zhang, J., Masood, H., Gunawan, D., Scott, J. A., & Amal, R. (2021) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/d0ee03116j · Cited by 263
Four principles of explainable artificial intelligence
Phillips, P. J., Hahn, C. A., Fontana, P. C., Yates, A. N., Greene, K., Broniatowski, D. A., & Przybocki, M. A. (2021) · doi:10.6028/nist.ir.8312 · Cited by 262
Turpin, M., Michael, J., Perez, E., & Bowman, S. R. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.04388 · Cited by 262
Trustworthy ai: A computational perspective
Liu, H., Wang, Y., Fan, W., Liu, X., Li, Y., Jain, S., Liu, Y., Jain, A., & Tang, J. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · doi:10.1145/3546872 · Cited by 261
Socially Responsible AI Algorithms: Issues, Purposes, and Challenges
Cheng, L., Varshney, K. R., & Liu, H. (2021) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.12814 · Cited by 261
Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2023) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13483 · Cited by 259
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Review, Ethics, Trust Challenges & Future Research Directions
Kumar, P., Chauhan, S., & Awasthi, L. K. (2023) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2023.105894 · Cited by 259
Stable learning establishes some common ground between causal inference and machine learning
Cui, P., & Athey, S. C. (2022) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-022-00445-z · Cited by 258
EXPLAINABLE-BY-DESIGN APPROACH FOR COVID-19 CLASSIFICATION VIA CT-SCANPreprint
Angelov, P. P., & Soares, E. A. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.24.20078584 · Cited by 258
Machine Learning for Clinical Outcome Prediction
Shamout, F. E., Zhu, T., & Clifton, D. A. (2020) · IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/rbme.2020.3007816 · Cited by 257
Contemporary Symbolic Regression Methods and their Relative Performance
Cava, W. L., Orzechowski, P., Burlacu, B., de França, F. O., Virgolin, M., Jin, Y., Kommenda, M., & Moore, J. H. (2021) · PubMed · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2107.14351 · Cited by 257
Jiang, S., Zheng, Y., Wang, C., & Babovic, V. (2021) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2021wr030185 · Cited by 257
Rawal, A., McCoy, J., Rawat, D. B., Sadler, B. M., & Amant, R. S. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tai.2021.3133846 · Cited by 257
Assuring the Machine Learning Lifecycle: Desiderata, Methods, and Challenges
Ashmore, R., Calinescu, R., & Paterson, C. (2022) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3453444 · Cited by 256
Metadata
- Authors
- Rudin, C.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rudin, Cynthia
- ORCID
- Rudin, Cynthia
- Venue
- Nature Machine Intelligence
- Published
- 2019-05-13
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 206-215
- ISSN
- 2522-5839 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9122117
- OpenAlex
- W2945976633
- Cited by
- 10,561
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2997 · 2025: 2162 · 2024: 1555 · 2023: 1293 · 2022: 1094 · 2021: 914 · 2020: 461 · 2019: 72
- FWCI
- 289.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Laura and John Arnold Foundation
- National Institutes of Health
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB025021)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
- Keywords
- black-box models, explainable AI, model interpretability, high-stakes decision making, criminal justice, health care, algorithmic harms, computer vision
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
