Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM48086
Volume:
9 |
5 |
May 2025
Pages:
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
As AI systems increasingly influence high-stakes decision-making processes, the need for transparent and interpretable models has become paramount. However, despite significant research advancements in XAI techniques, there remains a notable absence of standardized evaluation frameworks to assess explanation quality, particularly for ambiguous learning models deployed in distributed cloud environments. This paper examines the critical challenges in developing standardized evaluation metrics for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) within cloud-based infrastructures. This research identifies key barriers to standardization including the multidimensional nature of explanations, stakeholder diversity, operational constraints in cloud settings and the inherent complexity of modern AI systems. Through systematic analysis of current evaluation approaches, we propose a novel comprehensive evaluation framework with four core metrics: Fidelity Index (measuring truthfulness to the underlying model), Complexity Quotient (assessing cognitive accessibility), Operational Efficiency (quantifying resource requirements) and Stakeholder Alignment (evaluating relevance to different users). We validate our framework through empirical testing across three cloud platforms using both classification and natural language processing tasks, demonstrating significant improvements in explanation consistency (27.8%), stakeholder satisfaction (34.2%) and cross-platform standardization (41.3%) compared to existing approaches. Our findings reveal that effective standardization requires balancing technical rigor with contextual adaptability, addressing both objective computational measures and subjective human-centered assessments. This research contributes to the evolving discourse on XAI accountability by establishing a foundation for consistent, comparable evaluation standards that can accommodate the complexity of modern AI systems while meeting the varying needs of developers, users, regulators and cloud infrastructure providers.
KEYWORDS
Publication Date
5/16/2025
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
2
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...