Eye into AI: Evaluating the Interpretability of Explainable AI Techniques through a Game with a Purpose
Katelyn Morrison, Mayank Jain, Jessica Hammer, Adam Perer
Abstract
Recent developments in explainable AI (XAI) aim to improve the transparency of black-box models. However, empirically evaluating the interpretability of these XAI techniques is still an open challenge. The most common evaluation method is algorithmic performance, but such an approach may not accurately represent how interpretable these techniques are to people. A less common but growing evaluation strategy is to leverage crowd-workers to provide feedback on multiple XAI techniques to compare them. However, these tasks often feel like work and may limit participation. We propose a novel, playful, human-centered method for evaluating XAI techniques: a Game With a Purpose (GWAP), Eye into AI, that allows researchers to collect human evaluations of XAI at scale. We provide an empirical study demonstrating how our GWAP supports evaluating and comparing the agreement between three popular XAI techniques (LIME, Grad-CAM, and Feature Visualization) and humans, as well as evaluating and comparing the interpretability of those three XAI techniques applied to a deep learning model for image classification. The data collected from Eye into AI offers convincing evidence that GWAPs can be used to evaluate and compare XAI techniques. Eye into AI is available to the public: https://dig.cmu.edu/eyeintoai/.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 57f0860b-8bd8-4d48-a813-77ce30da08a0Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on4
- Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team PerformanceGagan Bansal, Tongshuang Wu, Joyce Zhou, Raymond Fok et al.CHI 2021 · 713 citations
- Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systemsUpol Ehsan, Q. Vera Liao, Michael J. Muller, Mark O. Riedl et al.CHI 2021 · 505 citations
- What Do You See?: Evaluation of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) Interpretability through Neural BackdoorsYi-Shan Lin, Wen-Chuan Lee, Z. Berkay CelikKDD 2021 · 62 citations
- Ready Player One! Eliciting Diverse Knowledge Using A Configurable GameAgathe Balayn, Gaole He, Andrea Hu, Jie Yang et al.WWW 2022 · 15 citations
Related papers
- Explainable Models with Consistent InterpretationsVipin Pillai, Hamed PirsiavashAAAI 2021 · 46 citations
- Unraveling the Dilemma of AI Errors: Exploring the Effectiveness of Human and Machine Explanations for Large Language ModelsMarvin Pafla, Kate Larson, Mark HancockCHI 2024 · 16 citations
- FIMAP: Feature Importance by Minimal Adversarial PerturbationMatt Chapman-Rounds, Umang Bhatt, Erik Pazos, Marc-Andre Schulz et al.AAAI 2021 · 14 citations
- How Can I Explain This to You? An Empirical Study of Deep Neural Network Explanation MethodsJeya Vikranth Jeyakumar, Joseph Noor, Yu-Hsi Cheng, Luis Garcia et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 173 citations
- Beyond Top Activations: Efficient and Reliable Crowdsourced Evaluation of Automated InterpretabilityTuomas Oikarinen, Ge Yan, Akshay Kulkarni, Tsui-Wei WengCVPR 2026 · 1 citation
