Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Evaluating Explainability: A Framework for Systematic Assessment and Reporting of Explainable AI Features

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2506.13917 v1 pith:JW7AA4DZ submitted 2025-06-16 cs.AI

Evaluating Explainability: A Framework for Systematic Assessment and Reporting of Explainable AI Features

classification cs.AI
keywords evaluationexplainabilityframeworkcriteriaexplanationfeaturesevaluatedexplanations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Explainability features are intended to provide insight into the internal mechanisms of an AI device, but there is a lack of evaluation techniques for assessing the quality of provided explanations. We propose a framework to assess and report explainable AI features. Our evaluation framework for AI explainability is based on four criteria: 1) Consistency quantifies the variability of explanations to similar inputs, 2) Plausibility estimates how close the explanation is to the ground truth, 3) Fidelity assesses the alignment between the explanation and the model internal mechanisms, and 4) Usefulness evaluates the impact on task performance of the explanation. Finally, we developed a scorecard for AI explainability methods that serves as a complete description and evaluation to accompany this type of algorithm. We describe these four criteria and give examples on how they can be evaluated. As a case study, we use Ablation CAM and Eigen CAM to illustrate the evaluation of explanation heatmaps on the detection of breast lesions on synthetic mammographies. The first three criteria are evaluated for clinically-relevant scenarios. Our proposed framework establishes criteria through which the quality of explanations provided by AI models can be evaluated. We intend for our framework to spark a dialogue regarding the value provided by explainability features and help improve the development and evaluation of AI-based medical devices.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Quantifying Explanation Consistency: The C-Score Metric for CAM-Based Explainability in Medical Image Classification

    cs.CV 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The C-Score quantifies intra-class explanation consistency for CAM methods via confidence-weighted pairwise soft IoU and detects AUC-consistency dissociation as an early warning for model instability on chest X-ray cl...