We introduce PASTA (Perceptual Assessment System for explanaTion of Artificial Intelligence), a novel human-centric framework for evaluating eXplainable AI (XAI) techniques in computer vision. Our first contribution is the creation of the PASTA-dataset, the first large-scale benchmark that spans a diverse set of models and both saliency-based and concept-based explanation methods. This dataset enables robust, comparative analysis of XAI techniques based on human judgment. Our second contribution is an automated, data-driven benchmark that predicts human preferences using the PASTA-dataset. This scoring called PASTA-score method offers scalable, reliable, and consistent evaluation aligned with human perception. Additionally, our benchmark allows for comparisons between explanations across different modalities, an aspect previously unaddressed. We then propose to apply our scoring method to probe the interpretability of existing models and to build more human interpretable XAI methods.

As Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) become more pervasive, it becomes paramount to build reliable tools for explaining their predictions. A core desideratum is that explanations are *faithful*, i.e., that they portray an accurate picture of the GNN's reasoning process. However, a number of different faithfulness metrics exist, begging the question of what is faithfulness exactly and how to achieve it. We make three key contributions. We begin by showing that *existing metrics are not interchangeable* -- i.e., explanations attaining high faithfulness according to one metric may be unfaithful according to others -- and can *systematically ignore important properties of explanations*. We proceed to show that, surprisingly, *optimizing for faithfulness is not always a sensible design goal*. Specifically, we prove that for injective regular GNN architectures, perfectly faithful explanations are completely uninformative. This does not apply to modular GNNs, such as self-explainable and domain-invariant architectures, prompting us to study the relationship between architectural choices and faithfulness. Finally, we show that *faithfulness is tightly linked to out-of-distribution generalization*, in that simply ensuring that a GNN can correctly recognize the domain-invariant subgraph, as prescribed by the literature, does not guarantee that it is invariant unless this subgraph is also faithful. All our code can be found in the supplementary material.

Self-Explainable Graph Neural Networks (SE-GNNs) are popular explainable-by-design GNNs, but their explanations' properties and limitations are not well understood. Our first contribution fills this gap by formalizing the explanations extracted by some popular SE-GNNs, referred to as Minimal Explanations (MEs), and comparing them to established notions of explanations, namely Prime Implicant (PI) and faithful explanations. Our analysis reveals that MEs match PI explanations for a restricted but significant family of tasks. In general, however, they can be less informative than PI explanations and are surprisingly misaligned with widely accepted notions of faithfulness. Although faithful and PI explanations are informative, they are intractable to find and we show that they can be prohibitively large. Given these observations, a natural choice is to augment SE-GNNs with alternative modalities of explanations taking care of SE-GNNs’ limitations. To this end, we propose Dual-Channel GNNs that integrate a white-box rule extractor and a standard SE-GNN, adaptively combining both channels. Our experiments show that even a simple instantiation of Dual-Channel GNNs can recover succinct rules and perform on par or better than widely used SE-GNNs.

Sentiment analysis is one of the most widely studied tasks in natural language processing. While BERT-based models have achieved state-of-the-art results in this task, little attention has been given to its performance variability across class labels, multi-source and multi-domain corpora. In this paper, we present an improved state-of-the-art and comparatively evaluate BERT-based models for sentiment analysis on Italian corpora. The proposed model is evaluated over eight sentiment analysis corpora from different domains (social media, finance, e-commerce, health, travel) and sources (Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Amazon, Tripadvisor, Opera and Personal Healthcare Agent) on the prediction of positive, negative and neutral classes. Our findings suggest that BERT-based models are confident in predicting positive and negative examples but not as much with neutral examples. We release the sentiment analysis model as well as a newly financial domain sentiment corpus.