Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/49627
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVANBRABANT, Sebe-
dc.contributor.authorTHYS, Jarne-
dc.contributor.authorEERLINGS, Gilles-
dc.contributor.authorLUYTEN, Kris-
dc.contributor.authorROVELO RUIZ, Gustavo-
dc.contributor.authorVANACKEN, Davy-
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-24T12:12:43Z-
dc.date.available2026-07-24T12:12:43Z-
dc.date.issued2026-
dc.date.submitted2026-06-30T09:00:57Z-
dc.identifier.citationProceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 10 (4) , p. 1 -31 (Art N° EICS012)-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1942/49627-
dc.description.abstractMachine learning systems are often inspected through 2D projections of high-dimensional representations using techniques such as t-SNE or UMAP. While these visualizations provide useful overviews of clustering and similarity, they are inherently static: they display only the existing data points and do not allow users to interactively explore a model’s decision space. We present an interactive exploration system — LAPEX— that uses a Variational Autoencoder (VAE) as a generative proxy over a model’s training distribution, turning the latent space into a navigable workspace for model sensemaking. Unlike static embeddings, the proxy provides an explicit decoding path from latent coordinates to inputs, enabling interaction patterns such as continuous sampling, interpolation between anchors, and region probing. We operationalize these capabilities through a set of interactive probes that augment a familiar scatter-plot overview with generative overlays for comparing transitions between classes and examining sparsely populated regions. A within-subject formative study (N = 16) comparing an interactive VAE-based method to a static t-SNE baseline shows that generative interaction substantially improves counterfactual reasoning and influences how users assess model behavior in sparse or uncertain regions, while static embeddings sometimes provide clearer boundary perception. From these findings, we derive concrete design guidelines and architectural considerations for engineering interactive AI model exploration systems using generative latent representations.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherACM-
dc.rightsCopyright © 2026 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.-
dc.subject.otherExplainable AI-
dc.subject.otherAI Model Sensemaking-
dc.subject.otherLatent Space Exploration-
dc.subject.otherMultidimensional Visual Exploration-
dc.subject.otherVariational Autoencoders-
dc.subject.otherDimensionality Reduction-
dc.titleFrom Embeddings to Exploration: Engineering Interactive Latent Space Visualizations for AI Model Sensemaking-
dc.typeJournal Contribution-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferencedate2026, June 30-July 3-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferencenameThe 18th ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferenceplacePatras, Greece-
dc.identifier.epage31-
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.spage1-
dc.identifier.volume10-
local.format.pages31-
local.bibliographicCitation.jcatA1-
local.publisher.placeNew York, NY, United States-
dc.relation.references[1] Ashraf Abdul, Jo Vermeulen, Danding Wang, Brian Y. Lim, and Mohan Kankanhalli. 2018. Trends and Trajectories for Explainable, Accountable and Intelligible Systems: An HCI Research Agenda. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–18. [2] Rachana Balasubramanian, Samuel Sharpe, Brian Barr, Jason Wittenbach, and C. Bayan Bruss. 2021. Latent-CF: A Simple Baseline for Reverse Counterfactual Explanations. In Workshop on Fair AI in Finance at NeurIPS. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/2012.09301 [cs.LG] https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.09301 [3] Alejandro Barredo Arrieta, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, Javier Del Ser, Adrien Bennetot, Siham Tabik, Alberto Barbado, Salvador Garcia, Sergio Gil-Lopez, Daniel Molina, Richard Benjamins, Raja Chatila, and Francisco Herrera. 2020. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion 58 (2020), 82–115. [4] Donald Bertucci and Alex Endert. 2024. VAE Explainer: Supplement Learning Variational Autoencoders with Interactive Visualization. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/2409.09011 [cs.HC] https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.09011 [5] Kelly Caine. 2016. Local Standards for Sample Size at CHI. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 981–992. [6] Sven Coppers, Jan Van den Bergh, Kris Luyten, Karin Coninx, Iulianna van der Lek-Ciudin, Tom Vanallemeersch, and Vincent Vandeghinste. 2018. Intellingo: An Intelligible Translation Environment. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. [7] Boris Delaunay. 1934. Sur la sphère vide. A la mémoire de Georges Voronoï. Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Mathematical Series6 (1934), 793–800. [8] Amit Dhurandhar, Pin-Yu Chen, Ronny Luss, Chun-Chen Tu, Paishun Ting, Karthikeyan Shanmugam, and Payel Das. 2018. Explanations based on the Missing: Towards Contrastive Explanations with Pertinent Negatives. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, H. Larochelle, K. Grauman, N. Cesa-Bianchi, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 31. Curran Associates, Inc.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2018/file/c5ff2543b53f4cc0ad3819a36752467b-Paper.pdf [9] Upol Ehsan, Q. Vera Liao, Michael Muller, Mark O. Riedl, and Justin D. Weisz. 2021. Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systems. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 82, 19 pages. [10] Niklas Elmqvist, Pierre Dragicevic, and Jean-Daniel Fekete. 2008. Rolling the Dice: Multidimensional Visual Exploration using Scatterplot Matrix Navigation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 14, 6 (2008), 1141–1148. [11] Riccardo Guidotti. 2024. Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 38, 5 (01 Sep 2024), 2770–2824. [12] Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Stan Matwin, and Dino Pedreschi. 2019. Black Box Explanation by Learning Image Exemplars in the Latent Feature Space. In Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases: European Conference, ECML PKDD 2019, Würzburg, Germany, September 16–20, 2019, Proceedings, Part I (Würzburg, Germany). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 189–205. [13] Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Salvatore Ruggieri, Franco Turini, Fosca Giannotti, and Dino Pedreschi. 2018. A Survey of Methods for Explaining Black Box Models. ACM Comput. Surv. 51, 5, Article 93 (Aug. 2018), 42 pages. [14] Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Francesco Spinnato, Dino Pedreschi, and Fosca Giannotti. 2020. Explaining Any Time Series Classifier. In 2020 IEEE Second International Conference on Cognitive Machine Intelligence (CogMI). 167–176. [15] David Gunning and David W. Aha. 2019. DARPA’s Explainable Artificial Intelligence Program. AI Magazine 40, 2 (2019), 44–58. arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1609/aimag.v40i2.2850 [16] Gaole He, Nilay Aishwarya, and Ujwal Gadiraju. 2025. Is Conversational XAI All You Need? Human-AI Decision Making With a Conversational XAI Assistant. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces(IUI ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 907–924. [17] Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 770–778. [18] Martin Heusel, Hubert Ramsauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Bernhard Nessler, and Sepp Hochreiter. 2017. GANs Trained by a Two Time-Scale Update Rule Converge to a Local Nash Equilibrium. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I. Guyon, U. Von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2017/file/8a1d694707eb0fefe65871369074926d-Paper.pdf [19] Irina Higgins, Loic Matthey, Arka Pal, Christopher Burgess, Xavier Glorot, Matthew Botvinick, Shakir Mohamed, and Alexander Lerchner. 2017. beta-VAE: Learning Basic Visual Concepts with a Constrained Variational Framework. In International Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview.net/forum?id=Sy2fzU9gl [20] Robert R. Hoffman, Shane T. Mueller, Gary Klein, and Jordan Litman. 2023. Measures for explainable AI: Explanation goodness, user satisfaction, mental models, curiosity, trust, and human-AI performance. Frontiers in Computer Science Volume 5 - 2023 (2023). [21] Fred Hohman, Andrew Head, Rich Caruana, Robert DeLine, and Steven M. Drucker. 2019. Gamut: A Design Probe to Understand How Data Scientists Understand Machine Learning Models. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. [22] Fred Hohman, Haekyu Park, Caleb Robinson, and Duen Horng Polo Chau. 2020. Summit: Scaling Deep Learning Interpretability by Visualizing Activation and Attribution Summarizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26, 1 (2020), 1096–1106. [23] Andreas Holzinger, André Carrington, and Heimo Müller. 2020. Measuring the Quality of Explanations: The System Causability Scale (SCS). KI - Künstliche Intelligenz 34, 2 (01 Jun 2020), 193–198. [24] Shalmali Joshi, Oluwasanmi Koyejo, Warut Vijitbenjaronk, Been Kim, and Joydeep Ghosh. 2019. Towards Realistic Individual Recourse and Actionable Explanations in Black-Box Decision Making Systems. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/1907.09615 [cs.LG] https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.09615 [25] Minsuk Kahng, Pierre Y. Andrews, Aditya Kalro, and Duen Horng Chau. 2018. ActiVis: Visual Exploration of Industry-Scale Deep Neural Network Models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 1 (2018), 88–97. [26] Been Kim, Rajiv Khanna, and Oluwasanmi O Koyejo. 2016. Examples are not enough, learn to criticize! Criticism for Interpretability. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, D. Lee, M. Sugiyama, U. Luxburg, I. Guyon, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 29. Curran Associates, Inc.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2016/file/5680522b8e2bb01943234bce7bf84534-Paper.pdf [27] Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. 2014. Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes. In International Conference on Learning Representations. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/1312.6114 [stat.ML] https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.6114 [28] Gary Klein, Judith K. Phillips, Elizabeth L. Rall, and David A. Peluso. 2007. A Data-Frame Theory of Sensemaking. In Expertise Out of Context: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making, Robert R. Hoffman (Ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 113–155. [29] Alex Krizhevsky. 2009. Learning Multiple Layers of Features from Tiny Images. [30] Solomon Kullback and Richard A. Leibler. 1951. On Information and Sufficiency. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 22, 1 (1951), 79 – 86. [31] Yann Lecun, Léon Bottou, Yoshua Bengio, and Patrick Haffner. 1998. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc. IEEE 86, 11 (1998), 2278–2324. [32] Oscar Li, Hao Liu, Chaofan Chen, and Cynthia Rudin. 2018. Deep Learning for Case-Based Reasoning Through Prototypes: A Neural Network That Explains Its Predictions. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 32, 1 (Apr. 2018). [33] Q. Vera Liao, Daniel Gruen, and Sarah Miller. 2020. Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–15. [34] Brian Y. Lim and Anind K. Dey. 2009. Assessing demand for intelligibility in context-aware applications. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (Orlando, Florida, USA) (UbiComp ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 195–204. [35] Brian Y. Lim and Anind K. Dey. 2010. Toolkit to support intelligibility in context-aware applications. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (Copenhagen, Denmark) (UbiComp ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 13–22. [36] Brian Y Lim, Qian Yang, Ashraf M Abdul, and Danding Wang. 2019. Why these Explanations? Selecting Intelligibility Types for Explanation Goals. In Explainable Smart Systems Workshop at IUI. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2327/IUI19WS-ExSS2019-20.pdf [37] Gabriel Lins de Holanda Coelho, Paul H P Hanel, and Lukas J Wolf. 2018. The Very Efficient Assessment of Need for Cognition: Developing a Six-Item Version. Assessment 27, 8 (Aug. 2018), 1870–1885. [38] Luca Longo, Mario Brcic, Federico Cabitza, Jaesik Choi, Roberto Confalonieri, Javier Del Ser, Riccardo Guidotti, Yoichi Hayashi, Francisco Herrera, Andreas Holzinger, Richard Jiang, Hassan Khosravi, Freddy Lecue, Gianclaudio Malgieri, Andrés Páez, Wojciech Samek, Johannes Schneider, Timo Speith, and Simone Stumpf. 2024. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) 2.0: A manifesto of open challenges and interdisciplinary research directions. Information Fusion 106 (2024), 102301. [39] Scott M Lundberg and Su-In Lee. 2017. A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I. Guyon, U. Von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2017/file/8a20a8621978632d76c43dfd28b67767-Paper.pdf [40] Divyat Mahajan, Chenhao Tan, and Amit Sharma. 2020. Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifiers. In Workshop on Do the right thing: Machine learning and Causal Inference for improved decision making at NeurIPS. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/1912.03277 [cs.LG] https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.03277 [41] Ettore Mariotti, Adarsa Sivaprasad, and Jose Maria Alonso Moral. 2023. Beyond Prediction Similarity: ShapGAP for Evaluating Faithful Surrogate Models in XAI. In Explainable Artificial Intelligence, Luca Longo (Ed.). Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 160–173. [42] David Martens, James Hinns, Camille Dams, Mark Vergouwen, and Theodoros Evgeniou. 2025. Tell me a story! Narrative-driven XAI with Large Language Models. Decision Support Systems 191 (2025), 114402. [43] Adrian Mayorga and Michael Gleicher. 2013. Splatterplots: Overcoming Overdraw in Scatter Plots. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19, 9 (2013), 1526–1538. [44] Leland McInnes, John Healy, and James Melville. 2020. UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reduction. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/1802.03426 [stat.ML] https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03426 [45] Carlo Metta, Eleonora Cappuccio, and Salvatore Rinzivillo. 2025. Interactive Visual Exploration of Latent Spaces for Explainable AI: Bridging Concepts and Features. In Adaptive XAI: Advancing Intelligent Interfaces for Tailored AI Explanations (2nd Edition) Workshop at IUI. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3957/AXAI-paper10.pdf [46] Sina Mohseni, Niloofar Zarei, and Eric D. Ragan. 2021. A Multidisciplinary Survey and Framework for Design and Evaluation of Explainable AI Systems. ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst. 11, 3–4, Article 24 (Sept. 2021), 45 pages. [47] Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas Kopf, Edward Yang, Zachary DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Tejani, Sasank Chilamkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu Fang, Junjie Bai, and Soumith Chintala. 2019. PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, H. Wallach, H. Larochelle, A. Beygelzimer, F. d'Alché-Buc, E. Fox, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 32. Curran Associates, Inc.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2019/file/bdbca288fee7f92f2bfa9f7012727740-Paper.pdf [48] Martin Pawelczyk, Klaus Broelemann, and Gjergji Kasneci. 2020. Learning Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Tabular Data. In Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020 (Taipei, Taiwan) (WWW ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3126–3132. [49] Karl Pearson. 1901. LIII. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 2, 11 (1901), 559–572. [50] Ken Perlin and David Fox. 1993. Pad: an alternative approach to the computer interface. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (Anaheim, CA) (SIGGRAPH ’93). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 57–64. [51] Peter Pirolli and Stuart Card. 1999. Information Foraging. Psychological Review 106, 4 (1999), 643–675. [52] Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. 2016. "Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (San Francisco, California, USA) (KDD ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1135–1144. [53] Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. 2018. Anchors: High-Precision Model-Agnostic Explanations. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 32, 1 (Apr. 2018). [54] Yao Rong, Tobias Leemann, Thai-Trang Nguyen, Lisa Fiedler, Peizhu Qian, Vaibhav Unhelkar, Tina Seidel, Gjergji Kasneci, and Enkelejda Kasneci. 2024. Towards Human-Centered Explainable AI: A Survey of User Studies for Model Explanations. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 46, 4 (2024), 2104–2122. [55] Cynthia Rudin. 2019. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nature Machine Intelligence 1, 5 (01 May 2019), 206–215. [56] Tom Sercu, Sebastian Gehrmann, Hendrik Strobelt, Payel Das, Inkit Padhi, Cícero Nogueira dos Santos, Kahini Wadhawan, and Vijil Chenthamarakshan. 2019. Interactive Visual Exploration of Latent Space (IVELS) for peptide auto-encoder model selection. In Deep Generative Models for Highly Structured Data Workshop at ICLR. [57] Jake Snell, Kevin Swersky, and Richard Zemel. 2017. Prototypical Networks for Few-shot Learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I. Guyon, U. Von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2017/file/cb8da6767461f2812ae4290eac7cbc42-Paper.pdf [58] Laurens van der Maaten and Geoffrey Hinton. 2008. Visualizing Data using t-SNE. Journal of Machine Learning Research 9, 86 (2008), 2579–2605. http://jmlr.org/papers/v9/vandermaaten08a.html [59] Arnaud Van Looveren and Janis Klaise. 2021. Interpretable Counterfactual Explanations Guided by Prototypes. In Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Research Track, Nuria Oliver, Fernando Pérez-Cruz, Stefan Kramer, Jesse Read, and Jose A. Lozano (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 650–665. [60] Sebe Vanbrabant, Gilles Eerlings, Gustavo Alberto Rovelo Ruiz, and Davy Vanacken. 2025. ECHO: Enhancing Conversational Explainable AI through Tool-Augmented Language Models. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 9, 4, Article EICS014 (June 2025), 33 pages. [61] Sahil Verma, Varich Boonsanong, Minh Hoang, Keegan Hines, John Dickerson, and Chirag Shah. 2024. Counterfactual Explanations and Algorithmic Recourses for Machine Learning: A Review. ACM Comput. Surv. 56, 12, Article 312 (Oct. 2024), 42 pages. [62] Warren J. von Eschenbach. 2021. Transparency and the Black Box Problem: Why We Do Not Trust AI. Philosophy & Technology 34, 4 (01 Dec 2021), 1607–1622. [63] Sandra Wachter, Brent D. Mittelstadt, and Chris Russell. 2018. Counterfactual Explanations Without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 31, 2 (2018), 841–887. Spring 2018. [64] Yingfan Wang, Haiyang Huang, Cynthia Rudin, and Yaron Shaposhnik. 2021. Understanding How Dimension Reduction Tools Work: An Empirical Approach to Deciphering t-SNE, UMAP, TriMap, and PaCMAP for Data Visualization. Journal of Machine Learning Research 22, 201 (2021), 1–73. http://jmlr.org/papers/v22/20-1061.html [65] Adam White and Artur d’Avila Garcez. 2020. Measurable Counterfactual Local Explanations for Any Classifier. In 24th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI). http://ecai2020.eu/papers/514_paper.pdf [66] Adam White, Kwun Ho Ngan, James Phelan, Kevin Ryan, Saman Sadeghi Afgeh, Constantino Carlos Reyes-Aldasoro, and Artur d’Avila Garcez. 2023. Contrastive counterfactual visual explanations with overdetermination. Machine Learning 112, 9 (01 Sep 2023), 3497–3525. [67] Han Xiao, Kashif Rasul, and Roland Vollgraf. 2017. Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithms. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/1708.07747 [cs.LG] https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.07747 [68] Yuzhe You, Helen Weixu Chen, and Jian Zhao. 2025. Enhancing AI Explainability for Non-technical Users with LLM-Driven Narrative Gamification. In Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 221, 7 pages. [69] Yuzhe You and Jian Zhao. 2024. Gamifying XAI: Enhancing AI Explainability for Non-technical Users through LLM-Powered Narrative Gamifications. arxiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/2410.04035 [cs.HC] https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.04035 [70] Tong Zhang, Mengao Zhang, Wei Yan Low, X. Jessie Yang, and Boyang Albert Li. 2025. Conversational Explanations: Discussing Explainable AI with Non-AI Experts. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces(IUI ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 409–424.-
local.type.refereedRefereed-
local.type.specifiedArticle-
local.bibliographicCitation.artnrEICS012-
dc.identifier.doi10.1145/3816764-
dc.identifier.eissn-
local.provider.typeCrossRef-
local.uhasselt.internationalno-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.accessRightsOpen Access-
item.fullcitationVANBRABANT, Sebe; THYS, Jarne; EERLINGS, Gilles; LUYTEN, Kris; ROVELO RUIZ, Gustavo & VANACKEN, Davy (2026) From Embeddings to Exploration: Engineering Interactive Latent Space Visualizations for AI Model Sensemaking. In: Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 10 (4) , p. 1 -31 (Art N° EICS012).-
item.contributorVANBRABANT, Sebe-
item.contributorTHYS, Jarne-
item.contributorEERLINGS, Gilles-
item.contributorLUYTEN, Kris-
item.contributorROVELO RUIZ, Gustavo-
item.contributorVANACKEN, Davy-
crisitem.journal.issn2573-0142-
Appears in Collections:Research publications
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
3816764.pdfPublished version3.81 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.