arXiv subjects

Brian Y Lim

Publications and source records attributed to Brian Y Lim.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Rules or Weights? Comparing User Understanding of Explainable AI Techniques with the Cognitive XAI-Adaptive Model

Rules and Weights are popular XAI techniques for explaining AI decisions. Yet, it remains unclear how to choose between them, lacking a cognitive framework to compare their interpretability. In an elicitation user study on forward and counterfactual decision tasks, we identified 7 reasoning strategies of interpreting three XAI Schemas - weights, rules, and their hybrid. To analyze their capabilities, we propose CoXAM, a Cognitive XAI-Adaptive Model with shared memory representation to encode instance attributes, linear weights, and decision rules. CoXAM employs computational rationality to choose among reasoning processes based on the trade-off in utility and reasoning time, separately for forward or counterfactual decision tasks. In a validation study, CoXAM demonstrated a stronger alignment with human decision-making compared to baseline machine learning proxy models. The model successfully replicated and explained several key empirical findings, including that counterfactual tasks are inherently harder than forward tasks, decision tree rules are harder to recall and apply than linear weights, and the helpfulness of XAI depends on the application data context, alongside identifying which underlying reasoning strategies were most effective. With CoXAM, we contribute a cognitive basis to accelerate debugging and benchmarking disparate XAI techniques.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Comparables XAI: Faithful Example-based AI Explanations with Counterfactual Trace Adjustments

Explaining with examples is an intuitive way to justify AI decisions. However, it is challenging to understand how a decision value should change relative to the examples with many features differing by large amounts. We draw from real estate valuation that uses Comparables-examples with known values for comparison. Estimates are made more accurate by hypothetically adjusting the attributes of each Comparable and correspondingly changing the value based on factors. We propose Comparables XAI for relatable example-based explanations of AI with Trace adjustments that trace counterfactual changes from each Comparable to the Subject, one attribute at a time, monotonically along the AI feature space. In modelling and user studies, Trace-adjusted Comparables achieved the highest XAI faithfulness and precision, user accuracy, and narrowest uncertainty bounds compared to linear regression, linearly adjusted Comparables, or unadjusted Comparables. This work contributes a new analytical basis for using example-based explanations to improve user understanding of AI decisions.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

iRULER: Intelligible Rubric-Based User-Defined LLM Evaluation for Revision

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become indispensable for evaluating writing. However, text feedback they provide is often unintelligible, generic, and not specific to user criteria. Inspired by structured rubrics in education and intelligible AI explanations, we propose iRULER following identified design guidelines to \textit{scaffold} the review process by \textit{specific} criteria, providing \textit{justification} for score selection, and offering \textit{actionable} revisions to target different quality levels. To \textit{qualify} user-defined criteria, we recursively used iRULER with a rubric-of-rubrics to iteratively \textit{refine} rubrics. In controlled experiments on writing revision and rubric creation, iRULER most improved validated LLM-judged review scores and was perceived as most helpful and aligned compared to read-only rubric and text-based LLM feedback. Qualitative findings further support how iRULER satisfies the design guidelines for user-defined feedback. This work contributes interactive rubric tools for intelligible LLM-based review and revision of writing, and user-defined rubric creation.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Editable XAI: Toward Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment with Co-Editable Explanations of Interpretable Attributes

While Explainable AI (XAI) helps users understand AI decisions, misalignment in domain knowledge can lead to disagreement. This inconsistency hinders understanding, and because explanations are often read-only, users lack the control to improve alignment. We propose making XAI editable, allowing users to write rules to improve control and gain deeper understanding through the generation effect of active learning. We developed CoExplain, leveraging a neural network for universal representation and symbolic rules for intuitive reasoning on interpretable attributes. CoExplain explains the neural network with a faithful proxy decision tree, parses user-written rules as an equivalent neural network graph, and collaboratively optimizes the decision tree. In a user study (N=43), CoExplain and manually editable XAI improved user understanding and model alignment compared to read-only XAI. CoExplain was easier to use with fewer edits and less time. This work contributes Editable XAI for bidirectional AI alignment, improving understanding and control.

cs.HC↗