ArticleScientific reports2026
Unified time series classification framework for explainable artificial intelligence.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Unified time series classification framework for explainable artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growing complexity of machine learning (ML) models has made their decision-making processes increasingly opaque, posing a critical challenge in high-stakes domains where trust, transparency, and accountability are essential. While Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques attempt to mitigate this issue, most existing approaches exhibit important limitations when applied to time series data due to its inherently sequential, dynamic, and context-dependent structure. In this work, we introduce the Unified Time Series Classification Framework for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (UTS-XAI), which integrates a standard classification pipeline with comprehensive, time-aware XAI evaluation metrics, such as faithfulness, robustness, sensitivity, stability, and localization. The framework supports multiple explanation methods, such as SHAP, LIME, and Saliency Maps, and enables their systematic comparison using adapted versions of widely used XAI metrics (faithfulness, robustness, sensitivity, and stability) reinterpreted for temporal data. We further propose Global Interpretable Clustering (GIC), a visualization technique designed to evaluate the consistency of feature attributions across different explainers and model architectures. Experiments on the MIT-BIH, SVDB, and INCART datasets show that DeepConvLSTM achieved robust baseline performance, maintaining an F1-score of 93.5% on the external INCART test set. Our quantitative analysis reveals that globally consistent methods such as SHAP significantly outperform localized techniques such as LIME and Saliency Maps. SHAP exhibits extreme faithfulness; ablating its top 10% of identified features collapses models' true positive detection rates from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text]. Furthermore, SHAP yields highly stable explanations across diverse deep architectures (median Dynamic Time Warping distance 1.5) and maintains superior structural robustness under noise (SSIM 0.95). Overall, our findings demonstrate that accuracy alone is insufficient in time series modeling without robust and reliable interpretability. By embedding explainability throughout the entire model development lifecycle, UTS-XAI establishes a unified foundation for interpretable, transparent, and trustworthy AI in temporal data analysis.
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.