mstyslavity/prisma_v3 huggingface dataset:
A critical challenge remains unresolved as generative AI systems are quickly implemented in various organizational settings. Despite significant advances in memory components such as RAG, vector stores, and LLM agents, these systems still have substantial memory limitations. Gen AI workflows rarely store or reflect on the full context in which decisions are made. This leads to repeated errors and a general lack of clarity. This paper introduces Contextual Memory Intelligence (CMI) as a new foundational paradigm for building intelligent systems. It repositions memory as an adaptive infrastructure necessary for longitudinal coherence, explainability, and responsible decision-making rather than passive data. Drawing on cognitive science, organizational theory, human-computer interaction, and AI governance, CMI formalizes the structured capture, inference, and regeneration of context as a fundamental system capability. The Insight Layer is presented in this paper to operationalize this vision. This modular architecture uses human-in-the-loop reflection, drift detection, and rationale preservation to incorporate contextual memory into systems. The paper argues that CMI allows systems to reason with data, history, judgment, and changing context, thereby addressing a foundational blind spot in current AI architectures and governance efforts. A framework for creating intelligent systems that are effective, reflective, auditable, and socially responsible is presented through CMI. This enhances human-AI collaboration, generative AI design, and the resilience of the institutions.
Graph representation learning has garnered significant attention due to its broad applications in various domains, such as recommendation systems and social network analysis. Despite advancements in graph learning methods, challenges still remain in explainability when graphs are associated with semantic features. In this paper, we present GraphNarrator, the first method designed to generate natural language explanations for Graph Neural Networks. GraphNarrator employs a generative language model that maps input-output pairs to explanations reflecting the model's decision-making process. To address the lack of ground truth explanations to train the model, we propose first generating pseudo-labels that capture the model's decisions from saliency-based explanations, then using Expert Iteration to iteratively train the pseudo-label generator based on training objectives on explanation quality. The high-quality pseudo-labels are finally utilized to train an end-to-end explanation generator model. Extensive experiments are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of GraphNarrator in producing faithful, concise, and human-preferred natural language explanations.
Opinion summarization plays a key role in deriving meaningful insights from large-scale online reviews. To make the process more explainable and grounded, we propose a domain-agnostic modular approach guided by review aspects (e.g., cleanliness for hotel reviews) which separates the tasks of aspect identification, opinion consolidation, and meta-review synthesis to enable greater transparency and ease of inspection. We conduct extensive experiments across datasets representing scientific research, business, and product domains. Results show that our approach generates more grounded summaries compared to strong baseline models, as verified through automated and human evaluations. Additionally, our modular approach, which incorporates reasoning based on review aspects, produces more informative intermediate outputs than other knowledge-agnostic decomposition approaches. Lastly, we provide empirical results to show that these intermediate outputs can support humans in summarizing opinions from large volumes of reviews.
Humanity is progressing towards automated product development, a trend that promises faster creation of better products and thus the acceleration of technological progress. However, increasing reliance on non-human agents for this process introduces many risks. This perspective aims to initiate a discussion on these risks and appropriate mitigation strategies. To this end, we outline a set of principles for safer AI-driven product development which emphasize human oversight, accountability, and explainable design, among others. The risk assessment covers both technical risks which affect product quality and safety, and sociotechnical risks which affect society. While AI-driven product development is still in its early stages, this discussion will help balance its opportunities and risks without delaying essential progress in understanding, norm-setting, and regulation.
Deep neural networks form the backbone of artificial intelligence research, with potential to transform the human experience in areas ranging from autonomous driving to personal assistants, healthcare to education. However, their integration into the daily routines of real-world classrooms remains limited. It is not yet common for a teacher to assign students individualized homework targeting their specific weaknesses, provide students with instant feedback, or simulate student responses to a new exam question. While these models excel in predictive performance, this lack of adoption can be attributed to a significant weakness: the lack of explainability of model decisions, leading to a lack of trust from students, parents, and teachers. This thesis aims to bring human needs to the forefront of eXplainable AI (XAI) research, grounded in the concrete use case of personalized learning and teaching. We frame the contributions along two verticals: technical advances in XAI and their aligned human studies. We investigate explainability in AI for education, revealing systematic disagreements between post-hoc explainers and identifying a need for inherently interpretable model architectures. We propose four novel technical contributions in interpretability with a multimodal modular architecture (MultiModN), an interpretable mixture-of-experts model (InterpretCC), adversarial training for explainer stability, and a theory-driven LLM-XAI framework to present explanations to students (iLLuMinaTE), which we evaluate in diverse settings with professors, teachers, learning scientists, and university students. By combining empirical evaluations of existing explainers with novel architectural designs and human studies, our work lays a foundation for human-centric AI systems that balance state-of-the-art performance with built-in transparency and trust.
In human-centric settings like education or healthcare, model accuracy and model explainability are key factors for user adoption. Towards these two goals, intrinsically interpretable deep learning models have gained popularity, focusing on accurate predictions alongside faithful explanations. However, there exists a gap in the human-centeredness of these approaches, which often produce nuanced and complex explanations that are not easily actionable for downstream users. We present InterpretCC (interpretable conditional computation), a family of intrinsically interpretable neural networks at a unique point in the design space that optimizes for ease of human understanding and explanation faithfulness, while maintaining comparable performance to state-of-the-art models. InterpretCC achieves this through adaptive sparse activation of features before prediction, allowing the model to use a different, minimal set of features for each instance. We extend this idea into an interpretable, global mixture-of-experts (MoE) model that allows users to specify topics of interest, discretely separates the feature space for each data point into topical subnetworks, and adaptively and sparsely activates these topical subnetworks for prediction. We apply InterpretCC for text, time series and tabular data across several real-world datasets, demonstrating comparable performance with non-interpretable baselines and outperforming intrinsically interpretable baselines. Through a user study involving 56 teachers, InterpretCC explanations are found to have higher actionability and usefulness over other intrinsically interpretable approaches.
Due to the increasing presence of networked devices in everyday life, not only cybersecurity specialists but also end users benefit from security applications such as firewalls, vulnerability scanners, and intrusion detection systems. Recent approaches use large language models (LLMs) to rewrite brief, technical security alerts into intuitive language and suggest actionable measures, helping everyday users understand and respond appropriately to security risks. However, it remains an open question how well such alerts are explained to users. LLM outputs can also be hallucinated, inconsistent, or misleading. In this work, we introduce the Human-Centered Security Alert Evaluation Framework (HCSAEF). HCSAEF assesses LLM-generated cybersecurity notifications to support researchers who want to compare notifications generated for everyday users, improve them, or analyze the capabilities of different LLMs in explaining cybersecurity issues. We demonstrate HCSAEF through three use cases, which allow us to quantify the impact of prompt design, model selection, and output consistency. Our findings indicate that HCSAEF effectively differentiates generated notifications along dimensions such as intuitiveness, urgency, and correctness.
Out-of-distribution (OOD) detection is essential for ensuring the reliability of deep learning models operating in open-world scenarios. Current OOD detectors mainly rely on statistical models to identify unusual patterns in the latent representations of a deep neural network. This work proposes to augment existing OOD detectors with probabilistic reasoning, utilizing Markov logic networks (MLNs). MLNs connect first-order logic with probabilistic reasoning to assign probabilities to inputs based on weighted logical constraints defined over human-understandable concepts, which offers improved explainability. Through extensive experiments on multiple datasets, we demonstrate that MLNs can significantly enhance the performance of a wide range of existing OOD detectors while maintaining computational efficiency. Furthermore, we introduce a simple algorithm for learning logical constraints for OOD detection from a dataset and showcase its effectiveness.
Toxicity mitigation consists in rephrasing text in order to remove offensive or harmful meaning. Neural natural language processing (NLP) models have been widely used to target and mitigate textual toxicity. However, existing methods fail to detoxify text while preserving the initial non-toxic meaning at the same time. In this work, we propose to apply counterfactual generation methods from the eXplainable AI (XAI) field to target and mitigate textual toxicity. In particular, we perform text detoxification by applying local feature importance and counterfactual generation methods to a toxicity classifier distinguishing between toxic and non-toxic texts. We carry out text detoxification through counterfactual generation on three datasets and compare our approach to three competitors. Automatic and human evaluations show that recently developed NLP counterfactual generators can mitigate toxicity accurately while better preserving the meaning of the initial text as compared to classical detoxification methods. Finally, we take a step back from using automated detoxification tools, and discuss how to manage the polysemous nature of toxicity and the risk of malicious use of detoxification tools. This work is the first to bridge the gap between counterfactual generation and text detoxification and paves the way towards more practical application of XAI methods.
Symbolic regression aims to discover mathematical equations that fit given numerical data. It has been applied in various fields of scientific research, such as producing human-readable expressions that explain physical phenomena. Recently, Neural symbolic regression (NSR) methods that involve Transformers pre-trained on large-scale synthetic datasets have gained attention. While these methods offer advantages such as short inference time, they suffer from low performance, particularly when the number of input variables is large. In this study, we hypothesized that this limitation stems from the memorization bias of Transformers in symbolic regression. We conducted a quantitative evaluation of this bias in Transformers using a synthetic dataset and found that Transformers rarely generate expressions not present in the training data. Additional theoretical analysis reveals that this bias arises from the Transformer's inability to construct expressions compositionally while verifying their numerical validity. We finally examined if tailoring test-time strategies can lead to reduced memorization bias and better performance. We empirically demonstrate that providing additional information to the model at test time can significantly mitigate memorization bias. On the other hand, we also find that reducing memorization bias does not necessarily correlate with improved performance. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the limitations of NSR approaches and offer a foundation for designing more robust, generalizable symbolic regression methods. Code is available at https://github.com/Shun-0922/Mem-Bias-NSR .
Automated answer grading is a critical challenge in educational technology, with the potential to streamline assessment processes, ensure grading consistency, and provide timely feedback to students. However, existing approaches are often constrained to specific exam formats, lack interpretability in score assignment, and struggle with real-world applicability across diverse subjects and assessment types. To address these limitations, we introduce RATAS (Rubric Automated Tree-based Answer Scoring), a novel framework that leverages state-of-the-art generative AI models for rubric-based grading of textual responses. RATAS is designed to support a wide range of grading rubrics, enable subject-agnostic evaluation, and generate structured, explainable rationales for assigned scores. We formalize the automatic grading task through a mathematical framework tailored to rubric-based assessment and present an architecture capable of handling complex, real-world exam structures. To rigorously evaluate our approach, we construct a unique, contextualized dataset derived from real-world project-based courses, encompassing diverse response formats and varying levels of complexity. Empirical results demonstrate that RATAS achieves high reliability and accuracy in automated grading while providing interpretable feedback that enhances transparency for both students and nstructors.
Time series analysis provides essential insights for real-world system dynamics and informs downstream decision-making, yet most existing methods often overlook the rich contextual signals present in auxiliary modalities. To bridge this gap, we introduce TimeXL, a multi-modal prediction framework that integrates a prototype-based time series encoder with three collaborating Large Language Models (LLMs) to deliver more accurate predictions and interpretable explanations. First, a multi-modal prototype-based encoder processes both time series and textual inputs to generate preliminary forecasts alongside case-based rationales. These outputs then feed into a prediction LLM, which refines the forecasts by reasoning over the encoder's predictions and explanations. Next, a reflection LLM compares the predicted values against the ground truth, identifying textual inconsistencies or noise. Guided by this feedback, a refinement LLM iteratively enhances text quality and triggers encoder retraining. This closed-loop workflow -- prediction, critique (reflect), and refinement -- continuously boosts the framework's performance and interpretability. Empirical evaluations on four real-world datasets demonstrate that TimeXL achieves up to 8.9\% improvement in AUC and produces human-centric, multi-modal explanations, highlighting the power of LLM-driven reasoning for time series prediction.
Recent multimodal image generators such as GPT-4o, Gemini 2.0 Flash, and Gemini 2.5 Pro excel at following complex instructions, editing images and maintaining concept consistency. However, they are still evaluated by disjoint toolkits: text-to-image (T2I) benchmarks that lacks multi-modal conditioning, and customized image generation benchmarks that overlook compositional semantics and common knowledge. We propose MMIG-Bench, a comprehensive Multi-Modal Image Generation Benchmark that unifies these tasks by pairing 4,850 richly annotated text prompts with 1,750 multi-view reference images across 380 subjects, spanning humans, animals, objects, and artistic styles. MMIG-Bench is equipped with a three-level evaluation framework: (1) low-level metrics for visual artifacts and identity preservation of objects; (2) novel Aspect Matching Score (AMS): a VQA-based mid-level metric that delivers fine-grained prompt-image alignment and shows strong correlation with human judgments; and (3) high-level metrics for aesthetics and human preference. Using MMIG-Bench, we benchmark 17 state-of-the-art models, including Gemini 2.5 Pro, FLUX, DreamBooth, and IP-Adapter, and validate our metrics with 32k human ratings, yielding in-depth insights into architecture and data design.
As machine learning models and autonomous agents are increasingly deployed in high-stakes, real-world domains such as healthcare, security, finance, and robotics, the need for transparent and trustworthy explanations has become critical. To ensure end-to-end transparency of AI decisions, we need models that are not only accurate but also fully explainable and human-tunable. We introduce BACON, a novel framework for automatically training explainable AI models for decision making problems using graded logic. BACON achieves high predictive accuracy while offering full structural transparency and precise, logic-based symbolic explanations, enabling effective human-AI collaboration and expert-guided refinement. We evaluate BACON with a diverse set of scenarios: classic Boolean approximation, Iris flower classification, house purchasing decisions and breast cancer diagnosis. In each case, BACON provides high-performance models while producing compact, human-verifiable decision logic. These results demonstrate BACON's potential as a practical and principled approach for delivering crisp, trustworthy explainable AI.
This paper calls on the research community not only to investigate how human biases are inherited by large language models (LLMs) but also to explore how these biases in LLMs can be leveraged to make society's "unwritten code" - such as implicit stereotypes and heuristics - visible and accessible for critique. We introduce a conceptual framework through a case study in science: uncovering hidden rules in peer review - the factors that reviewers care about but rarely state explicitly due to normative scientific expectations. The idea of the framework is to push LLMs to speak out their heuristics through generating self-consistent hypotheses - why one paper appeared stronger in reviewer scoring - among paired papers submitted to 45 computer science conferences, while iteratively searching deeper hypotheses from remaining pairs where existing hypotheses cannot explain. We observed that LLMs' normative priors about the internal characteristics of good science extracted from their self-talk, e.g. theoretical rigor, were systematically updated toward posteriors that emphasize storytelling about external connections, such as how the work is positioned and connected within and across literatures. This shift reveals the primacy of scientific myths about intrinsic properties driving scientific excellence rather than extrinsic contextualization and storytelling that influence conceptions of relevance and significance. Human reviewers tend to explicitly reward aspects that moderately align with LLMs' normative priors (correlation = 0.49) but avoid articulating contextualization and storytelling posteriors in their review comments (correlation = -0.14), despite giving implicit reward to them with positive scores. We discuss the broad applicability of the framework, leveraging LLMs as diagnostic tools to surface the tacit codes underlying human society, enabling more precisely targeted responsible AI.
A classifier is considered interpretable if each of its decisions has an explanation which is small enough to be easily understood by a human user. A DNF formula can be seen as a binary classifier $\kappa$ over boolean domains. The size of an explanation of a positive decision taken by a DNF $\kappa$ is bounded by the size of the terms in $\kappa$, since we can explain a positive decision by giving a term of $\kappa$ that evaluates to true. Since both positive and negative decisions must be explained, we consider that interpretable DNFs are those $\kappa$ for which both $\kappa$ and $\overline{\kappa}$ can be expressed as DNFs composed of terms of bounded size. In this paper, we study the family of $k$-DNFs whose complements can also be expressed as $k$-DNFs. We compare two such families, namely depth-$k$ decision trees and nested $k$-DNFs, a novel family of models. Experiments indicate that nested $k$-DNFs are an interesting alternative to decision trees in terms of interpretability and accuracy.
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at text summarization, a task that requires models to select content based on its importance. However, the exact notion of salience that LLMs have internalized remains unclear. To bridge this gap, we introduce an explainable framework to systematically derive and investigate information salience in LLMs through their summarization behavior. Using length-controlled summarization as a behavioral probe into the content selection process, and tracing the answerability of Questions Under Discussion throughout, we derive a proxy for how models prioritize information. Our experiments on 13 models across four datasets reveal that LLMs have a nuanced, hierarchical notion of salience, generally consistent across model families and sizes. While models show highly consistent behavior and hence salience patterns, this notion of salience cannot be accessed through introspection, and only weakly correlates with human perceptions of information salience.
From uncertainty quantification to real-world object detection, we recognize the importance of machine learning algorithms, particularly in safety-critical domains such as autonomous driving or medical diagnostics. In machine learning, ambiguous data plays an important role in various machine learning domains. Optical illusions present a compelling area of study in this context, as they offer insight into the limitations of both human and machine perception. Despite this relevance, optical illusion datasets remain scarce. In this work, we introduce a novel dataset of optical illusions featuring intermingled animal pairs designed to evoke perceptual ambiguity. We identify generalizable visual concepts, particularly gaze direction and eye cues, as subtle yet impactful features that significantly influence model accuracy. By confronting models with perceptual ambiguity, our findings underscore the importance of concepts in visual learning and provide a foundation for studying bias and alignment between human and machine vision. To make this dataset useful for general purposes, we generate optical illusions systematically with different concepts discussed in our bias mitigation section. The dataset is accessible in Kaggle via https://kaggle.com/datasets/693bf7c6dd2cb45c8a863f9177350c8f9849a9508e9d50526e2ffcc5559a8333. Our source code can be found at https://github.com/KDD-OpenSource/Ambivision.git.