Lukas Schmidt

Christoffer Loeffler, Wei-Cheng Lai, Bjoern Eskofier et al.

The correct interpretation of convolutional models is a hard problem for time series data. While saliency methods promise visual validation of predictions for image and language processing, they fall short when applied to time series. These tend to be less intuitive and represent highly diverse data, such as the tool-use time series dataset. Furthermore, saliency methods often generate varied, conflicting explanations, complicating the reliability of these methods. Consequently, a rigorous objective assessment is necessary to establish trust in them. This paper investigates saliency methods on time series data to formulate recommendations for interpreting convolutional models and implements them on the tool-use time series problem. To achieve this, we first employ nine gradient-, propagation-, or perturbation-based post-hoc saliency methods across six varied and complex real-world datasets. Next, we evaluate these methods using five independent metrics to generate recommendations. Subsequently, we implement a case study focusing on tool-use time series using convolutional classification models. Our results validate our recommendations that indicate that none of the saliency methods consistently outperforms others on all metrics, while some are sometimes ahead. Our insights and step-by-step guidelines allow experts to choose suitable saliency methods for a given model and dataset.

Domenique Zipperling, Lukas Schmidt, Benedikt Hahn et al.

Current clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) typically base their predictions on correlation, not causation. In recent years, causal machine learning (ML) has emerged as a promising way to improve decision-making with CDSSs by offering interpretable, treatment-specific reasoning. However, existing research often emphasizes model development rather than designing clinician-facing interfaces. To address this gap, we investigated how CDSSs based on causal ML should be designed to effectively support collaborative clinical decision-making. Using a design science research methodology, we conducted a structured literature review and interviewed experienced physicians. From these, we derived eight empirically grounded design requirements, developed seven design principles, and proposed nine practical design features. Our results establish guidance for designing CDSSs that deliver causal insights, integrate seamlessly into clinical workflows, and support trust, usability, and human-AI collaboration. We also reveal tensions around automation, responsibility, and regulation, highlighting the need for an adaptive certification process for ML-based medical products.