MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414182515 · doi:10.1061/jtepbs.teeng-8808

From Opacity to Clarity: Employing Explainable AI to Interpret CNN Predictions on Winter Road Conditions

2025· article· en· W4414182515 on OpenAlexaff
Mingjian Wu, Tae J. Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Engineering Part A Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkTransparency (behavior)Deep learningLimitingFeature (linguistics)Scrutiny

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of deep learning models for winter road surface conditions (RSC) classification has advanced in recent years. However, most of these models remain nontransparent, limiting confidence in their predictions. This study is a pioneering effort that employs two explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques, gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) and Shapley additive explanations (SHAP), to clarify the processes through which convolutional neural networks (CNNs) interpret winter RSC imagery. Grad-CAM provides visual explanations by highlighting important regions in the images, while SHAP offers numerical evaluations of feature importance and identifies features with negative contributions. Such scrutiny is vital both practically and methodologically as it offers transparency and facilitates more reliable artificial intelligence (AI) integration into RSC monitoring. Our investigation focuses on three components: CNN’s attention to relevant image features, the influence of training data size, and the impact of varying CNN architectures. The findings demonstrate that CNNs classify RSC imagery by identifying critical features, such as the road surface portion of the image, and that an increased number of training samples enhances learning capabilities. The study further confirms that different architectures might also affect prediction performance. By unveiling the internal decision-making processes of CNNs, this study addresses the transparency gap and contributes to more effective and informed winter road maintenance operations. The integration of XAI techniques ensures that AI models are not only accurate but also interpretable, enhancing their practical applicability. These insights not only reinforce trust in AI’s real-world applications but also deepen understanding of CNNs, thereby encouraging the development of transparent and reliable AI models, particularly for improving winter transportation safety and mobility.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transportation Engineering Part A SystemsSame topicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)French-language works237,207