Measuring Information in Text Explanations
Zining Zhu, Frank Rudzicz
OpenReview ground truth
Abstract
Text-based explanation is a particularly promising approach in explainable AI, but the evaluation of text explanations is method-dependent. We argue that placing the explanations on an information-theoretic framework could unify the evaluations of two popular text explanation methods: rationale and natural language explanations (NLE). This framework considers the post-hoc text pipeline as a series of communication channels, which we refer to as ``explanation channels''. We quantify the information flow through these channels, thereby facilitating the assessment of explanation characteristics. We set up tools for quantifying two information scores: relevance and informativeness. We illustrate what our proposed information scores measure by comparing them against some traditional evaluation metrics. Our information-theoretic scores reveal some unique observations about the underlying mechanisms of two representative text explanations. For example, the NLEs trade-off slightly between transmitting the input-related information and the target-related information, whereas the rationales do not exhibit such a trade-off mechanism. Our work contributes to the ongoing efforts in establishing rigorous and standardized evaluation criteria in the rapidly evolving field of explainable AI.
Author context
Most prolific author: 2 submissions (credibility 1.00).
No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 38 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 44% of matchups.
- ▲ beat Efficient OCR for Building a Diverse Digit… ×4
- ▼ lost to ASMR: Activation-Sharing Multi-Resolution … ×4
- ▼ lost to PromptAgent: Strategic Planning with Langu… ×4
- ▼ lost to Accurate Retraining-free Pruning for Pretr… ×4
- ▼ lost to Towards More Accurate Diffusion Model Acce… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 38)