ArticleJournal of imaging2025
SegClarity: An Attribution-Based XAI Workflow for Evaluating Historical Document Layout Models.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, deep learning networks have demonstrated remarkable progress in the semantic segmentation of historical documents. Nonetheless, their limited explainability remains a critical concern, as these models frequently operate as black boxes, thereby constraining confidence in the trustworthiness of their outputs. To enhance transparency and reliability in their deployment, increasing attention has been directed toward explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques. These techniques typically produce fine-grained attribution maps in the form of heatmaps, illustrating feature contributions from different blocks and layers within a deep neural network (DNN). However, such maps often closely resemble the segmentation outputs themselves, and there is currently no consensus regarding appropriate explainability metrics for semantic segmentation. To overcome these challenges, we present SegClarity, a novel workflow designed to integrate explainability into the analysis of historical documents. The workflow combines visual and quantitative evaluations specifically tailored to segmentation-based applications. Furthermore, we introduce the Attribution Concordance Score (ACS), a new explainability metric that provides quantitative insights into the consistency and reliability of attribution maps. To evaluate the effectiveness of our approach, we conducted extensive qualitative and quantitative experiments using two datasets of historical document images, two U-Net model variants, and four attribution-based XAI methods. A qualitative assessment involved four XAI methods across multiple U-Net layers, including comparisons at the input level with state-of-the-art perturbation methods RISE and MiSuRe. Quantitatively, five XAI evaluation metrics were employed to benchmark these approaches comprehensively. Beyond historical document analysis, we further validated the workflow's generalization by demonstrating its transferability to the Cityscapes dataset, a challenging benchmark for urban scene segmentation. The results demonstrate that the proposed workflow substantially improves the interpretability and reliability of deep learning models applied to the semantic segmentation of historical documents. To enhance reproducibility, we have released SegClarity's source code along with interactive examples of the proposed workflow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.