arXiv subjects

Francesco Giannini

Publications and source records attributed to Francesco Giannini.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

The Standard Interpretable Model: A general theory of interpretable machine learning to deductively design interpretable methods using Lagrangian mechanics

As Artificial Intelligence models grow in complexity, interpretability has become an indispensable tool for understanding, debugging, and controlling their computations. However, interpretability lacks general theories to deductively design interpretable methods. This gap between theories and methods results in a fragmented literature and inconsistent evaluation protocols. To fill this gap, we introduce the Standard Interpretable Model (SIM), a general theory grounded in Lagrangian mechanics that enables the deductive design of interpretable methods. Specifically, the SIM summarises, in a set of premises, what interpretability is for a target user. From these premises, the SIM systematically derives interpretability symmetries and corresponding constraints, which shape the landscape of a Lagrangian whose minima correspond to optimal interpretable models. To reach the minima, one can either update the parameter values of an opaque model to make it more interpretable or compile constraints into an interpretable architecture. We empirically show that the SIM identifies and solves limitations of existing methods (including traditional, concept-based, and mechanistic interpretability), highlights underexplored research directions, and informs the design of core programming interfaces. Beyond being a research method, the deductive nature of the SIM offers pedagogical grounding for interpretability curricula and may shift the scientific community's perspective of a discipline that has long been fragmented.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Comparing Explanations is Not Enough, Explain the Change: New Standards are Needed to Explain Behavioral Shifts in Large Language Models

Large-scale foundation models exhibit behavioral shifts when subjected to interventions such as scaling, fine-tuning, reinforcement learning with human feedback, or in-context learning. Current explainability methods are structurally ill-suited to explain these shifts, because they either treat models as static objects, as traditional eXplainable AI (XAI) approaches do, or merely compare independent explanations across different checkpoints of a model. As a result, these approaches fail to explain the functional transition between two model instances in which a certain behavior has shifted following an intervention. This gap creates significant governance risks across jurisdictions including the EU AI Act, US state legislation, and Chinese AI regulations, which require documenting causal chains for substantial system modifications. This position paper argues that explaining behavioral shifts in large language models requires a principled approach that treats the shift itself as the primary object of explanation: namely, one that explains how and why an intervention transforms a reference model into an updated model with different behavior. To support this claim, we introduce Comparative XAI (XAI$_\Delta$), a novel XAI paradigm aimed at explaining the difference between two model checkpoints where a behavior has shifted, together with a set of desiderata specifying what XAI$_\Delta$ explainers and explanations must satisfy, including comparability, validity, actionability, and monitoring, with the goal of grounding model auditing in explicit, measurable requirements. Finally, we provide preliminary evidence suggesting the need for XAI$_\Delta$ in practice through illustrative experiments, compiling the resulting findings into a transition report directly usable for governance and incident documentation.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Mixture of Concept Bottleneck Experts

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) promote interpretability by grounding predictions in human-understandable concepts. However, existing CBMs typically constrain their task predictor to a single expression whose functional form is set a priori, limiting both predictive accuracy and adaptability to diverse user needs. We propose Mixture of Concept Bottleneck Experts (M-CBE), a framework that generalizes existing CBMs along two dimensions: the number of expressions, referred to as experts, employed by the task predictor to map concepts to the task, and the functional form each expression takes, thus exposing an underexplored region of this design space. We investigate this region by instantiating two novel models: Linear M-CBE, which learns a finite set of linear expressions, and Symbolic M-CBE, which leverages symbolic regression to discover expert functions from data subject to user-specified operator vocabularies. Empirical evaluation demonstrates that varying the number of expressions and their functional form provides a robust framework for navigating the accuracy-interpretability trade-off.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Actionable Interpretability Must Be Defined in Terms of Symmetries

This paper argues that interpretability research in Artificial Intelligence (AI) is fundamentally ill-posed as existing definitions of interpretability fail to describe how interpretability can be formally tested or designed for. We posit that actionable definitions of interpretability must be formulated in terms of *symmetries* that inform model design and lead to testable conditions. Under a probabilistic view, we hypothesise that four symmetries (inference equivariance, information invariance, concept-closure invariance, and structural invariance) suffice to (i) formalise interpretable models as a subclass of probabilistic models, (ii) yield a unified formulation of interpretable inference (e.g., alignment, interventions, and counterfactuals) as a form of Bayesian inversion, and (iii) provide a formal framework to verify compliance with safety standards and regulations.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

DeepProofLog: Efficient Proving in Deep Stochastic Logic Programs

Neurosymbolic (NeSy) AI aims to combine the strengths of neural architectures and symbolic reasoning to improve the accuracy, interpretability, and generalization capability of AI models. While logic inference on top of subsymbolic modules has been shown to effectively guarantee these properties, this often comes at the cost of reduced scalability, which can severely limit the usability of NeSy models. This paper introduces DeepProofLog (DPrL), a novel NeSy system based on stochastic logic programs, which addresses the scalability limitations of previous methods. DPrL parameterizes all derivation steps with neural networks, allowing efficient neural guidance over the proving system. Additionally, we establish a formal mapping between the resolution process of our deep stochastic logic programs and Markov Decision Processes, enabling the application of dynamic programming and reinforcement learning techniques for efficient inference and learning. This theoretical connection improves scalability for complex proof spaces and large knowledge bases. Our experiments on standard NeSy benchmarks and knowledge graph reasoning tasks demonstrate that DPrL outperforms existing state-of-the-art NeSy systems, advancing scalability to larger and more complex settings than previously possible.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Grounding Methods for Neural-Symbolic AI

A large class of Neural-Symbolic (NeSy) methods employs a machine learner to process the input entities, while relying on a reasoner based on First-Order Logic to represent and process more complex relationships among the entities. A fundamental role for these methods is played by the process of logic grounding, which determines the relevant substitutions for the logic rules using a (sub)set of entities. Some NeSy methods use an exhaustive derivation of all possible substitutions, preserving the full expressive power of the logic knowledge. This leads to a combinatorial explosion in the number of ground formulas to consider and, therefore, strongly limits their scalability. Other methods rely on heuristic-based selective derivations, which are generally more computationally efficient, but lack a justification and provide no guarantees of preserving the information provided to and returned by the reasoner. Taking inspiration from multi-hop symbolic reasoning, this paper proposes a parametrized family of grounding methods generalizing classic Backward Chaining. Different selections within this family allow us to obtain commonly employed grounding methods as special cases, and to control the trade-off between expressiveness and scalability of the reasoner. The experimental results show that the selection of the grounding criterion is often as important as the NeSy method itself.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

If Concept Bottlenecks are the Question, are Foundation Models the Answer?

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) are neural networks designed to conjoin high performance with ante-hoc interpretability. CBMs work by first mapping inputs (e.g., images) to high-level concepts (e.g., visible objects and their properties) and then use these to solve a downstream task (e.g., tagging or scoring an image) in an interpretable manner. Their performance and interpretability, however, hinge on the quality of the concepts they learn. The go-to strategy for ensuring good quality concepts is to leverage expert annotations, which are expensive to collect and seldom available in applications. Researchers have recently addressed this issue by introducing "VLM-CBM" architectures that replace manual annotations with weak supervision from foundation models. It is however unclear what is the impact of doing so on the quality of the learned concepts. To answer this question, we put state-of-the-art VLM-CBMs to the test, analyzing their learned concepts empirically using a selection of significant metrics. Our results show that, depending on the task, VLM supervision can sensibly differ from expert annotations, and that concept accuracy and quality are not strongly correlated. Our code is available at https://github.com/debryu/CQA.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Deferring Concept Bottleneck Models: Learning to Defer Interventions to Inaccurate Experts

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) are machine learning models that improve interpretability by grounding their predictions on human-understandable concepts, allowing for targeted interventions in their decision-making process. However, when intervened on, CBMs assume the availability of humans that can identify the need to intervene and always provide correct interventions. Both assumptions are unrealistic and impractical, considering labor costs and human error-proneness. In contrast, Learning to Defer (L2D) extends supervised learning by allowing machine learning models to identify cases where a human is more likely to be correct than the model, thus leading to deferring systems with improved performance. In this work, we gain inspiration from L2D and propose Deferring CBMs (DCBMs), a novel framework that allows CBMs to learn when an intervention is needed. To this end, we model DCBMs as a composition of deferring systems and derive a consistent L2D loss to train them. Moreover, by relying on a CBM architecture, DCBMs can explain why defer occurs on the final task. Our results show that DCBMs achieve high predictive performance and interpretability at the cost of deferring more to humans.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Logic Explanation of AI Classifiers by Categorical Explaining Functors

The most common methods in explainable artificial intelligence are post-hoc techniques which identify the most relevant features used by pretrained opaque models. Some of the most advanced post hoc methods can generate explanations that account for the mutual interactions of input features in the form of logic rules. However, these methods frequently fail to guarantee the consistency of the extracted explanations with the model's underlying reasoning. To bridge this gap, we propose a theoretically grounded approach to ensure coherence and fidelity of the extracted explanations, moving beyond the limitations of current heuristic-based approaches. To this end, drawing from category theory, we introduce an explaining functor which structurally preserves logical entailment between the explanation and the opaque model's reasoning. As a proof of concept, we validate the proposed theoretical constructions on a synthetic benchmark verifying how the proposed approach significantly mitigates the generation of contradictory or unfaithful explanations.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Mathematical Foundation of Interpretable Equivariant Surrogate Models

This paper introduces a rigorous mathematical framework for neural network explainability, and more broadly for the explainability of equivariant operators called Group Equivariant Operators (GEOs) based on Group Equivariant Non-Expansive Operators (GENEOs) transformations. The central concept involves quantifying the distance between GEOs by measuring the non-commutativity of specific diagrams. Additionally, the paper proposes a definition of interpretability of GEOs according to a complexity measure that can be defined according to each user preferences. Moreover, we explore the formal properties of this framework and show how it can be applied in classical machine learning scenarios, like image classification with convolutional neural networks.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2025

Neural Interpretable Reasoning

We formalize a novel modeling framework for achieving interpretability in deep learning, anchored in the principle of inference equivariance. While the direct verification of interpretability scales exponentially with the number of variables of the system, we show that this complexity can be mitigated by treating interpretability as a Markovian property and employing neural re-parametrization techniques. Building on these insights, we propose a new modeling paradigm -- neural generation and interpretable execution -- that enables scalable verification of equivariance. This paradigm provides a general approach for designing Neural Interpretable Reasoners that are not only expressive but also transparent.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Interpretable Concept-Based Memory Reasoning

The lack of transparency in the decision-making processes of deep learning systems presents a significant challenge in modern artificial intelligence (AI), as it impairs users' ability to rely on and verify these systems. To address this challenge, Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) have made significant progress by incorporating human-interpretable concepts into deep learning architectures. This approach allows predictions to be traced back to specific concept patterns that users can understand and potentially intervene on. However, existing CBMs' task predictors are not fully interpretable, preventing a thorough analysis and any form of formal verification of their decision-making process prior to deployment, thereby raising significant reliability concerns. To bridge this gap, we introduce Concept-based Memory Reasoner (CMR), a novel CBM designed to provide a human-understandable and provably-verifiable task prediction process. Our approach is to model each task prediction as a neural selection mechanism over a memory of learnable logic rules, followed by a symbolic evaluation of the selected rule. The presence of an explicit memory and the symbolic evaluation allow domain experts to inspect and formally verify the validity of certain global properties of interest for the task prediction process. Experimental results demonstrate that CMR achieves better accuracy-interpretability trade-offs to state-of-the-art CBMs, discovers logic rules consistent with ground truths, allows for rule interventions, and allows pre-deployment verification.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

AnyCBMs: How to Turn Any Black Box into a Concept Bottleneck Model

Interpretable deep learning aims at developing neural architectures whose decision-making processes could be understood by their users. Among these techniqes, Concept Bottleneck Models enhance the interpretability of neural networks by integrating a layer of human-understandable concepts. These models, however, necessitate training a new model from the beginning, consuming significant resources and failing to utilize already trained large models. To address this issue, we introduce "AnyCBM", a method that transforms any existing trained model into a Concept Bottleneck Model with minimal impact on computational resources. We provide both theoretical and experimental insights showing the effectiveness of AnyCBMs in terms of classification performances and effectivenss of concept-based interventions on downstream tasks.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Explainable Malware Detection with Tailored Logic Explained Networks

Malware detection is a constant challenge in cybersecurity due to the rapid development of new attack techniques. Traditional signature-based approaches struggle to keep pace with the sheer volume of malware samples. Machine learning offers a promising solution, but faces issues of generalization to unseen samples and a lack of explanation for the instances identified as malware. However, human-understandable explanations are especially important in security-critical fields, where understanding model decisions is crucial for trust and legal compliance. While deep learning models excel at malware detection, their black-box nature hinders explainability. Conversely, interpretable models often fall short in performance. To bridge this gap in this application domain, we propose the use of Logic Explained Networks (LENs), which are a recently proposed class of interpretable neural networks providing explanations in the form of First-Order Logic (FOL) rules. This paper extends the application of LENs to the complex domain of malware detection, specifically using the large-scale EMBER dataset. In the experimental results we show that LENs achieve robustness that exceeds traditional interpretable methods and that are rivaling black-box models. Moreover, we introduce a tailored version of LENs that is shown to generate logic explanations with higher fidelity with respect to the model's predictions.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2024

Counterfactual Concept Bottleneck Models

Current deep learning models are not designed to simultaneously address three fundamental questions: predict class labels to solve a given classification task (the "What?"), simulate changes in the situation to evaluate how this impacts class predictions (the "How?"), and imagine how the scenario should change to result in different class predictions (the "Why not?"). The inability to answer these questions represents a crucial gap in deploying reliable AI agents, calibrating human trust, and improving human-machine interaction. To bridge this gap, we introduce CounterFactual Concept Bottleneck Models (CF-CBMs), a class of models designed to efficiently address the above queries all at once without the need to run post-hoc searches. Our experimental results demonstrate that CF-CBMs: achieve classification accuracy comparable to black-box models and existing CBMs ("What?"), rely on fewer important concepts leading to simpler explanations ("How?"), and produce interpretable, concept-based counterfactuals ("Why not?"). Additionally, we show that training the counterfactual generator jointly with the CBM leads to two key improvements: (i) it alters the model's decision-making process, making the model rely on fewer important concepts (leading to simpler explanations), and (ii) it significantly increases the causal effect of concept interventions on class predictions, making the model more responsive to these changes.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Relational Concept Bottleneck Models

The design of interpretable deep learning models working in relational domains poses an open challenge: interpretable deep learning methods, such as Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs), are not designed to solve relational problems, while relational deep learning models, such as Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), are not as interpretable as CBMs. To overcome these limitations, we propose Relational Concept Bottleneck Models (R-CBMs), a family of relational deep learning methods providing interpretable task predictions. As special cases, we show that R-CBMs are capable of both representing standard CBMs and message-passing GNNs. To evaluate the effectiveness and versatility of these models, we designed a class of experimental problems, ranging from image classification to link prediction in knowledge graphs. In particular we show that R-CBMs (i) match generalization performance of existing relational black-boxes, (ii) support the generation of quantified concept-based explanations, (iii) effectively respond to test-time interventions, and (iv) withstand demanding settings including out-of-distribution scenarios, limited training data regimes, and scarce concept supervisions.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Interpretable Graph Networks Formulate Universal Algebra Conjectures

The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) recently empowered researchers to investigate hard mathematical problems which eluded traditional approaches for decades. Yet, the use of AI in Universal Algebra (UA) -- one of the fields laying the foundations of modern mathematics -- is still completely unexplored. This work proposes the first use of AI to investigate UA's conjectures with an equivalent equational and topological characterization. While topological representations would enable the analysis of such properties using graph neural networks, the limited transparency and brittle explainability of these models hinder their straightforward use to empirically validate existing conjectures or to formulate new ones. To bridge these gaps, we propose a general algorithm generating AI-ready datasets based on UA's conjectures, and introduce a novel neural layer to build fully interpretable graph networks. The results of our experiments demonstrate that interpretable graph networks: (i) enhance interpretability without sacrificing task accuracy, (ii) strongly generalize when predicting universal algebra's properties, (iii) generate simple explanations that empirically validate existing conjectures, and (iv) identify subgraphs suggesting the formulation of novel conjectures.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Categorical Foundations of Explainable AI: A Unifying Theory

Explainable AI (XAI) aims to address the human need for safe and reliable AI systems. However, numerous surveys emphasize the absence of a sound mathematical formalization of key XAI notions -- remarkably including the term "explanation" which still lacks a precise definition. To bridge this gap, this paper presents the first mathematically rigorous definitions of key XAI notions and processes, using the well-funded formalism of Category theory. We show that our categorical framework allows to: (i) model existing learning schemes and architectures, (ii) formally define the term "explanation", (iii) establish a theoretical basis for XAI taxonomies, and (iv) analyze commonly overlooked aspects of explaining methods. As a consequence, our categorical framework promotes the ethical and secure deployment of AI technologies as it represents a significant step towards a sound theoretical foundation of explainable AI.

cs.AI↗