When analysing a complex system, very often an answer for one question raises new questions. The same law applies to the analysis of Machine Learning (ML) models. One method to explain the model is not enough because different questions and different stakeholders need different approaches. Most of the proposed methods for eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) focus on a single aspect of model behaviour. However, we cannot sufficiently explain a complex model using a single method that gives only one perspective. Isolated explanations are prone to misunderstanding, which inevitably leads to wrong reasoning.  In this paper, we present the problem of model explainability as an interactive and sequential explanatory analysis of a model (IEMA). We introduce the grammar of such interactive explanations. We show how different XAI methods complement each other and why it is essential to juxtapose them together. We argue that without multi-faceted interactive explanation, there will be no understanding nor trust for models. The proposed process  derives from the theoretical, algorithmic side of the model explanation and aims to embrace ideas learned through research in cognitive sciences. Its grammar is implemented in the modelStudio framework that adopts interactivity, automation and customisablity as its main traits . This thoughtful design addresses the needs of multiple diverse stakeholders, not only ML practitioners .
When analysing a complex system, very often an answer to one question raises new questions. This also applies to the explanatory analysis of machine learning models. We cannot sufficiently explain a complex model using a single method that gives only one perspective. Isolated explanations are prone to misunderstanding, which inevitably leads to wrong reasoning. Surprisingly, the majority of methods developed for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) focus on a single aspect of the model behaviour. In this paper, we show the problem of model explainability as an interactive and sequential analysis of a model . We show how different XAI methods complement each other and why it is essential to juxtapose them together. The proposed process of Interactive Explanatory Model Analysis (IEMA) derives from the theoretical, algorithmic side of the model explanation and aims to embrace ideas developed in cognitive sciences. Its grammar is implemented in the modelStudio framework that adopts interactivity, customisability and automation as its main traits .
R
for
to
R
The same law
This also
R
analysis of Machine Learning (ML) models. One method to explain the model is not enough because different questions and different stakeholders need different approaches. Most of the proposed methods for eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) focus on a single aspect of model behaviour. However, we
explanatory analysis of machine learning models. We
A
Surprisingly, the majority of methods developed for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) focus on a single aspect of the model behaviour.
R
present
show
D
explanatory
R
(IEMA). We introduce the grammar of such interactive explanations. We
. We
D
We argue that without multi-faceted interactive explanation, there will be no understanding nor trust for models.
A
of Interactive Explanatory Model Analysis (IEMA)
R
learned through research
developed
R
automation and customisablity
customisability and automation
D
. This thoughtful design addresses the needs of multiple diverse stakeholders, not only ML practitioners