ArticleScientific reports2026
Opening the black box: explainable AI for automated bioturbation analysis in cores and outcrops.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
Abstract
The application of machine learning (ML) in geology has gained significant momentum over the past decade. Given the importance of visual interpretation in geological tasks such as lithological classification and trace fossil identification, automating these processes through ML has offered substantial benefits to both researchers and industry professionals, including reduced human error and increased efficiency. While machine learning methodologies commonly yield highly accurate results, the opacity of decision-making processes can present challenges, as they often provide "black box" responses. To address this issue and improve user trust and interpretability, the integration of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has emerged as a promising solution. XAI techniques provide visual explanations, typically in the form of heat maps, indicating the specific regions within an image that the model prioritized in reaching its classification. Despite its growing relevance, the application of XAI within the geosciences remains in its infancy. This study evaluates the effectiveness of XAI in the context of bioturbation intensity classification using a pre-trained deep-learning model. The model classifies core and outcrop images into three categories: (1) unbioturbated, (2) moderately bioturbated, and (3) intensely bioturbated. XAI visualizations reveal strong alignment with an experienced ichnologist's interpretations. Our findings highlight the utility of XAI in enhancing the transparency, and reliability, as well as ability to conduct a consistent, rapid assessment of images to increase efficiency of ML-based geological interpretation. In addition to its potential for improving confidence, XAI may serve as a valuable educational tool, especially in specialized domains such as ichnology, wherein expert knowledge is typically limited in academic and industry settings.
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.