Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
We argue that the trend toward providing users with feasible and actionable explanations of AI decisions, known as recourse explanations, comes with ethical downsides. Specifically, we argue that recourse explanations face several conceptual pitfalls and can lead to problematic explanation hacking, which undermines their ethical status. As an alternative, we advocate that explanations of AI decisions should aim at understanding.
Sullivan et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: