Skip to content

XAI-Arena: Can LLMs Assess the Quality of XAI Explanations?

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 71 references
Computer Science

Abstract

Evaluating the quality of explanations produced by explainable AI (XAI) methods remains challenging because existing approaches often rely on subjective human judgment, limiting reproducibility, scalability, and comparability between studies. We examine whether LLMs can serve as a reproducible and scalable mechanism to make comparative assessments of the quality of XAI explanations. We introduce XAI-Arena, an LLM-as-a-judge framework for scalable, reproducible, multidimensional, and stakeholder-sensitive evaluation of XAI explanation quality. XAI-Arena then allows us to compare XAI explanations along various dimensions, namely, perceived simplicity, clarity, task adequacy, trust calibration, actionability, transparency, faithfulness, and overall interpretability. We then benchmark XAI explanation methods across various datasets, machine learning models, and stakeholder personas. Human validation shows a strong positive association between LLM-generated and human ratings (Spearman's rho=.693, p<.001). Together, LLM-based evaluations can capture systematic differences in XAI explanation quality and provide a scalable and reproducible framework for comparative assessment of XAI explanations.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Open access May 2023

Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models on GAOKAO Benchmark

GAOKAO-Bench is introduced, an intuitive benchmark that employs questions from the Chinese GAOKAO examination as test samples, including both subjective and objective questions that contribute a robust evaluation benchmark for future large language models and offers valuable insights into the advantages and limitations...

Xiaotian Zhang, Chun-yan Li, Yi Zong et al. · 216 citations · ⚡17

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28
#artificial intelligence Open access Jul 2024

Gender, Race, and Intersectional Bias in Resume Screening via Language Model Retrieval

This work investigates the possibilities of using LLMs in a resume screening setting via a document retrieval framework that simulates job candidate selection and finds that the MTEs are biased, significantly favoring White-associated names in 85% of cases and female-associated names in only 11.1% of cases.

Kyra Wilson, Aylin Caliskan · 131 citations · ⚡8
#artificial intelligence Review Nov 2024

How to Build a Quantum Supercomputer: Scaling from Hundreds to Millions of Qubits

This work shows that orders of magnitude enhancement in performance could be obtained by a combination of hardware improvements and tight quantum-HPC integration and introduces high-performance architectures for quantum-probabilistic computing with custom-designed accelerators to tackle today's industry-scale classical...

Masoud Mohseni, Artur Scherer, K. Johnson et al. · 121 citations · ⚡9
#artificial intelligence Review Oct 2025

Ultralytics YOLO Evolution: An Overview of YOLO26, YOLO11, YOLOv8 and YOLOv5 Object Detectors for Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the Ultralytics YOLO family, emphasizing architectural evolution, benchmarking, deployment, and emerging directions from YOLOv5 through YOLO27, and examines detection, segmentation, depth, classification, pose, oriented detection, tracking, export, quantization, and deplo...

Ranjan Sapkota, Manoj Karkee · 112 citations · ⚡10

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.