
Recognizing daily activities with unobtrusive sensors in smart environments enables various healthcare applications. Monitoring how subjects perform activities at home and their changes over time can reveal early symptoms of health issues, such as cognitive decline. Most approaches in this field use deep learning models, which are often seen as black boxes mapping sensor data to activities. However, non-expert users like clinicians need to trust and understand these models' outputs. Thus, eXplainable AI (XAI) methods for Human Activity Recognition have emerged to provide intuitive natural language explanations from these models. Different XAI methods generate different explanations, and their effectiveness is typically evaluated through user surveys, that are often challenging in terms of costs and fairness. This paper proposes an automatic evaluation method using Large Language Models (LLMs) to identify, in a pool of candidates, the best XAI approach for non-expert users. Our preliminary results suggest that LLM evaluation aligns with user surveys.
Accepted for publication at UbiComp / ISWC 2024's XAIforU workshop
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI), Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence, Computer Science - Human-Computer Interaction, Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in ubiquitous and mobile computing; HCI design and evaluation methods, Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI), Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence, Computer Science - Human-Computer Interaction, Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in ubiquitous and mobile computing; HCI design and evaluation methods, Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
