This review aims to formalize XAI methods in CompPath through the introduction of a pathology-centric vocabulary comprising seven core terms and establishment of a task-driven framework that maps five clinical questions to recommended methods, method evaluation, and deployment context.
Abstract
Computational pathology (CompPath) is transforming medicine by leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to support diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment prediction from gigapixel whole-slide images. Clinical adoption is progressing, but is constrained by concerns about safety, accountability, and regulatory oversight in high-stakes clinical environments. Explainable AI (XAI) systems hold promise for building trust and enabling verification, yet the literature remains fragmented due to inconsistent terminology, overlapping methodological families, ad hoc validation, and current reviews. This review aims to formalize XAI methods in CompPath through the: i) introduction of a pathology-centric vocabulary comprising seven core terms; ii) development of a taxonomy across methodological families and three orthogonal axes (stage, type, scope); and iii) establishment of a task-driven framework that maps five clinical questions to recommended methods, method evaluation, and deployment context. Five key gaps between current XAI capabilities and clinical deployment are identified, and actionable steps are proposed to advance XAI for CompPath.
The GenXAI vision is presented, a system architecture that combines Genomic Language Models with Explainable AI (XAI) and physician-facing visual interfaces to support trustworthy, reproducible microbial species identification from metagenomic data.
Andrea Esposito, Paolo Buono, R. Lanzilotti· TRI-IVIS@AVI· 1 citation
This systematic review provides a comprehensive analysis of XAI methods specifically applied to tabular healthcare data for classification tasks, revealing that SHAP remains the dominant post-hoc method, achieving strong model fidelity but showing inconsistent alignment with clinical expert reasoning.
Angelower Santana-Velásquez, M. B. Salazar-Sánchez· Computers· 0 citations
An accessible overview of XAI is provided, including saliency maps, perturbation-based and feature-attribution approaches, concept- based methods, and example-based reasoning, as well as uncertainty quantification as a complementary approach for assessing prediction reliability, along with common misconceptions and eme...
Gorkem Durak, H. Aktas, Tugba Akinci D'Antonoli et al.· Diagnostic and Interventiona...· 0 citations
This work reviews agentic systems in computational pathology using an operational taxonomy based on dynamic control flow, inference-time tool selection, and knowledge integration to emphasize validation scope, computational cost, workflow integration, hallucination and security risks, regulatory requirements, patient p...
Xin-Yu Lu, Qian-Kun Li, Yak Gao et al.· Journal of Translational Med...· 1 citation
This review provides a comprehensive overview of recent developments in XAI for healthcare, focusing on key methods for achieving interpretability, such as intrinsically interpretable models, and post-hoc explanation methods such as SHAP, LIME, Grad-CAM, attention mechanisms, surrogate models, and counterfactual explan...
S. R. Ali, .a. Meher Nisha, K. A. Sathik et al.· International Journal of Int...· 0 citations
It is concluded that explainability is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition for trustworthy Al, and concrete directions for future research are outlined, including standardised benchmarks, human-centred evaluation, and explainability for large generative models.
Afna Ashraff M, Archana K, Buthaina Buthaina et al.· International Journal of Tec...· 0 citations
Known for his clear and elegant writing style, Bertsekas shaped fields from control and optimization to large-scale computation and artificial intelligence.