MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185459628

Research Agenda for Basic Explainable AI.

2021· article· en· W3185459628 on OpenAlexaff
Roman Lukyanenko, Arturo Castellanos, Binny M. Samuel, Monica Chiarini Tremblay, Wolfgang Maaß

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData scienceManagement scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial Intelligence is increasingly driven by powerful but often opaque machine learning algorithms. These black-box algorithms achieve high performance but are not explainable to humans in a systematic and interpretable manner, a challenge known as Explainable AI (XAI). Informed by a synthesis of two converging literature streams on information systems development and psychology, we propose a new XAI approach termed Basic Explainable AI and a subsequent research agenda. We propose four research directions that focus on providing explanations by proactively considering the target audience's mental models and making the explanations maximally accessible to heterogeneous nonexpert users.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)French-language works237,207