Cited by 50Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)AI-based Problem Solving and PlanningLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge

Hierarchical Expertise Level Modeling for User Specific Contrastive Explanations

Open access
Sreedharan, Sarath, Srivastava, Siddharth, Kambhampati, Subbarao·2018·Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

There is a growing interest within the AI research community in developing autonomous systems capable of explaining their behavior to users. However, the problem of computing explanations for users of different levels of expertise has received little research attention. We propose an approach for addressing this problem by representing the user's understanding of the task as an abstraction of the domain model that the planner uses. We present algorithms for generating minimal explanations in cases where this abstract human model is not known. We reduce the problem of generating an explanation to a search over the space of abstract models and show that while the complete problem is NP-hard, a greedy algorithm can provide good approximations of the optimal solution. We also empirically show that our approach can efficiently compute explanations for a variety of problems.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24963/ijcai.2018/671

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Joseph C Culberson and Jonathan Schaeffer. Pattern databases. Computational In- telligence, 14(3):318-334, 1998.
  2. Maria Fox, Derek Long, and Daniele Mag- azzeni. Explainable Planning. In IJCAI XAI Workshop, 2017.
  3. Tania Lombrozo. The structure and func- tion of explanations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(10):464 -470, 2006.
  4. Tania Lombrozo. Explanation and abduc- tive inference. Oxford handbook of thinking and reason- ing, pages 260-276, 2012.
  5. Ben Leon Meadows, Pat Langley, and Miranda Jane Emery. Seeing beyond shadows: In- cremental abductive reasoning for plan understanding. In AAAI Workshop: Plan, Activity, and Intent Recognition, volume 13, page 13, 2013.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sreedharan, S., Srivastava, S., & Kambhampati, S.
Affiliations
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85281 USA
Corresponding author
Srivastava, Siddharth
Venue
Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2018-07
Pages
4829-4836
OpenAlex
W2808460052
Cited by
50
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.27
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NNX17AD06G)
  • Office of Naval Research (N00014-13-1-0176, N00014-15-1-2027, FA9550, N00014-13-1-0519, N00014)
  • Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550-, FA9550‐18‐1‐0067)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Keywords
explainable AI, contrastive explanations, hierarchical models, NP-hardness, greedy approximation, autonomous systems, explanation generation

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