Explainability-Driven Quality Assessment for Rule-Based Systems

This paper introduces an explanation framework designed to enhance the quality of rules in knowledge-based reasoning systems based on dataset-driven insights. The traditional method for rule induction from data typically requires labor-intensive labeling and data-driven learning. This framework provides an alternative and instead allows for the data-driven refinement of existing rules: it generates explanations of rule inferences and leverages human interpretation to refine rules. It leverages four complementary explanation types-trace-based, contextual, contrastive, and counterfactual-providing diverse perspectives for debugging, validating, and ultimately refining rules. By embedding explainability into the reasoning architecture, the framework enables knowledge engineers to address inconsistencies, optimize thresholds, and ensure fairness, transparency, and interpretability in decision-making processes. Its practicality is demonstrated through a use case in finance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-05-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3701716.3717571
Primary Topic
Business Process Modeling and Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Explainability-Driven Quality Assessment for Rule-Based Systems

William Van Woensel, Oshani Seneviratne, Brendan Capuzzo
Business Process Modeling and Analysis
article

Explainability-Driven Quality Assessment for Rule-Based Systems

William Van Woensel, Oshani Seneviratne, Brendan Capuzzo
article en

Abstract

This paper introduces an explanation framework designed to enhance the quality of rules in knowledge-based reasoning systems based on dataset-driven insights. The traditional method for rule induction from data typically requires labor-intensive labeling and data-driven learning. This framework provides an alternative and instead allows for the data-driven refinement of existing rules: it generates explanations of rule inferences and leverages human interpretation to refine rules. It leverages four complementary explanation types-trace-based, contextual, contrastive, and counterfactual-providing diverse perspectives for debugging, validating, and ultimately refining rules. By embedding explainability into the reasoning architecture, the framework enables knowledge engineers to address inconsistencies, optimize thresholds, and ensure fairness, transparency, and interpretability in decision-making processes. Its practicality is demonstrated through a use case in finance.

University of Ottawa (CA), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Business Process Modeling and Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Explainability-Driven Quality Assessment for Rule-Based Systems — William Van Woensel, Oshani Seneviratne, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS