Papers › Explanation-by-Example Based on Item Response Theory

Explanation-by-Example Based on Item Response Theory

4 Oct 2022arXiv:2210.01638archive 2025-07-28

Lucas F. F. Cardoso, José de S. Ribeiro, Vitor C. A. Santos, Raíssa L. Silva, Marcelle P. Mota, Ricardo B. C. Prudêncio, Ronnie C. O. Alves

Intelligent systems that use Machine Learning classification algorithms are increasingly common in everyday society. However, many systems use black-box models that do not have characteristics that allow for self-explanation of their predictions. This situation leads researchers in the field and society to the following question: How can I trust the prediction of a model I cannot understand? In this sense, XAI emerges as a field of AI that aims to create techniques capable of explaining the decisions of the classifier to the end-user. As a result, several techniques have emerged, such as Explanation-by-Example, which has a few initiatives consolidated by the community currently working with XAI. This research explores the Item Response Theory (IRT) as a tool to explaining the models and measuring the level of reliability of the Explanation-by-Example approach. To this end, four datasets with different levels of complexity were used, and the Random Forest model was used as a hypothesis test. From the test set, 83.8% of the errors are from instances in which the IRT points out the model as unreliable.

PaperPDFCode

Code

lucasferrarocardoso/irt_xai officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Test

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections