Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2311.11055

Designing Interpretable ML System to Enhance Trust in Healthcare: A Systematic Review to Proposed Responsible Clinician-AI-Collaboration Framework

Elham Nasarian·Roohallah Alizadehsani·U. Rajendra Acharya·Kwok-Leung Tsui
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This paper explores the significant impact of AI-based medical devices, including wearables, telemedicine, large language models, and digital twins, on clinical decision support systems. It emphasizes the importance of producing outcomes that are not only accurate but also interpretable and understandable to clinicians, addressing the risk that lack of interpretability poses in terms of mistrust and reluctance to adopt these technologies in healthcare. The paper reviews interpretable AI processes, methods, applications, and the challenges of implementation in healthcare, focusing on quality control to facilitate responsible communication between AI systems and clinicians. It breaks down the interpretability process into data pre-processing, model selection, and post-processing, aiming to foster a comprehensive understanding of the crucial role of a robust interpretability approach in healthcare and to guide future research in this area. with insights for creating responsible clinician-AI tools for healthcare, as well as to offer a deeper understanding of the challenges they might face. Our research questions, eligibility criteria and primary goals were identified using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline and PICO method; PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were systematically searched using sensitive and specific search strings. In the end, 52 publications were selected for data extraction which included 8 existing reviews and 44 related experimental studies. The paper offers general concepts of interpretable AI in healthcare and discuss three-levels interpretability process. Additionally, it provides a comprehensive discussion of evaluating robust interpretability AI in healthcare. Moreover, this survey introduces a step-by-step roadmap for implementing responsible AI in healthcare.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.HCcs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elham Nasarian, Roohallah Alizadehsani, U. Rajendra Acharya, Kwok-Leung Tsui. 2023-11-18. Designing Interpretable ML System to Enhance Trust in Healthcare: A Systematic Review to Proposed Responsible Clinician-AI-Collaboration Framework. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2024.102412

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗