
Learning Quantifiable Visual Explanations Without Ground-Truth
A new framework tackles a fundamental bottleneck in explainable AI: how to measure explanation quality without labeled ground-truth data. The approach uses continuous input perturbation to quantify whether attributed features are truly sufficient and necessary for model decisions, addressing a gap where existing metrics often diverge from human judgment. The authors also propose a trainable XAI method that uses this metric as a differentiable loss signal, enabling models to learn more faithful explanations during fine-tuning. This work matters because XAI validation remains largely subjective, limiting deployment of interpretability tools in regulated domains where auditable explanations are non-negotiable.62




























