Papers › XTSC-Bench: Quantitative Benchmarking for Explainers on Time Series Classification

XTSC-Bench: Quantitative Benchmarking for Explainers on Time Series Classification

23 Oct 2023arXiv:2310.14957archive 2025-07-28

Jacqueline Höllig, Steffen Thoma, Florian Grimm

Despite the growing body of work on explainable machine learning in time series classification (TSC), it remains unclear how to evaluate different explainability methods. Resorting to qualitative assessment and user studies to evaluate explainers for TSC is difficult since humans have difficulties understanding the underlying information contained in time series data. Therefore, a systematic review and quantitative comparison of explanation methods to confirm their correctness becomes crucial. While steps to standardized evaluations were taken for tabular, image, and textual data, benchmarking explainability methods on time series is challenging due to a) traditional metrics not being directly applicable, b) implementation and adaption of traditional metrics for time series in the literature vary, and c) varying baseline implementations. This paper proposes XTSC-Bench, a benchmarking tool providing standardized datasets, models, and metrics for evaluating explanation methods on TSC. We analyze 3 perturbation-, 6 gradient- and 2 example-based explanation methods to TSC showing that improvements in the explainers' robustness and reliability are necessary, especially for multivariate data.

PaperPDFCode

Code

jhoelli/xtsc-bench officialmentioned in paperpytorch 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

BenchmarkingTime SeriesTime Series Classification

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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