Building an investment portfolio is a problem that numerous researchers have addressed for many years. The key goal has always been to balance risk and reward by optimally allocating assets such as stocks, bonds, and cash. In general, the portfolio management process is based on three steps: planning, execution, and feedback, each of which has its objectives and methods to be employed. Starting from Markowitz\'s mean-variance portfolio theory, different frameworks have been widely accepted, which considerably renewed how asset allocation is being solved. Recent advances in artificial intelligence provide methodological and technological capabilities to solve highly complex problems, and investment portfolio is no exception. For this reason, the paper reviews the current state-of-the-art approaches by answering the core question of how artificial intelligence is transforming portfolio management steps. Moreover, as the use of artificial intelligence in finance is challenged by transparency, fairness and explainability requirements, the case study of post-hoc explanations for asset allocation is demonstrated. Finally, we discuss recent regulatory developments in the European investment business and highlight specific aspects of this business where explainable artificial intelligence could advance transparency of the investment process.

OBJECTIVE: To review eXplainable Artificial Intelligence/(XAI) methods available for medical imaging/(MI).
METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute\'s methodology. The search was performed on Pubmed, Embase, Cinhal, Web of Science, BioRxiv, MedRxiv, and Google Scholar. Studies published in French and English after 2017 were included. Keyword combinations and descriptors related to explainability, and MI modalities were employed. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts, titles and full text, resolving differences through discussion.
RESULTS: 228 studies met the criteria. XAI publications are increasing, targeting MRI (n = 73), radiography (n = 47), CT (n = 46). Lung (n = 82) and brain (n = 74) pathologies, Covid-19 (n = 48), Alzheimer\'s disease (n = 25), brain tumors (n = 15) are the main pathologies explained. Explanations are presented visually (n = 186), numerically (n = 67), rule-based (n = 11), textually (n = 11), and example-based (n = 6). Commonly explained tasks include classification (n = 89), prediction (n = 47), diagnosis (n = 39), detection (n = 29), segmentation (n = 13), and image quality improvement (n = 6). The most frequently provided explanations were local (78.1 %), 5.7 % were global, and 16.2 % combined both local and global approaches. Post-hoc approaches were predominantly employed. The used terminology varied, sometimes indistinctively using explainable (n = 207), interpretable (n = 187), understandable (n = 112), transparent (n = 61), reliable (n = 31), and intelligible (n = 3).
CONCLUSIONS: The number of XAI publications in medical imaging is increasing, primarily focusing on applying XAI techniques to MRI, CT, and radiography for classifying and predicting lung and brain pathologies. Visual and numerical output formats are predominantly used. Terminology standardisation remains a challenge, as terms like \"explainable\" and \"interpretable\" are sometimes being used indistinctively. Future XAI development should consider user needs and perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Despite the touted potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) to revolutionize health care, clinical decision support tools, herein referred to as medical modeling software (MMS), have yet to realize the anticipated benefits. One proposed obstacle is the acknowledged gaps in AI translation. These gaps stem partly from the fragmentation of processes and resources to support MMS transparent documentation. Consequently, the absence of transparent reporting hinders the provision of evidence to support the implementation of MMS in clinical practice, thereby serving as a substantial barrier to the successful translation of software from research settings to clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to scope the current landscape of AI- and ML-based MMS documentation practices and elucidate the function of documentation in facilitating the translation of ethical and explainable MMS into clinical workflows.
METHODS: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. PubMed was searched using Medical Subject Headings key concepts of AI, ML, ethical considerations, and explainability to identify publications detailing AI- and ML-based MMS documentation, in addition to snowball sampling of selected reference lists. To include the possibility of implicit documentation practices not explicitly labeled as such, we did not use documentation as a key concept but as an inclusion criterion. A 2-stage screening process (title and abstract screening and full-text review) was conducted by 1 author. A data extraction template was used to record publication-related information; barriers to developing ethical and explainable MMS; available standards, regulations, frameworks, or governance strategies related to documentation; and recommendations for documentation for papers that met the inclusion criteria.
RESULTS: Of the 115 papers retrieved, 21 (18.3%) papers met the requirements for inclusion. Ethics and explainability were investigated in the context of AI- and ML-based MMS documentation and translation. Data detailing the current state and challenges and recommendations for future studies were synthesized. Notable themes defining the current state and challenges that required thorough review included bias, accountability, governance, and explainability. Recommendations identified in the literature to address present barriers call for a proactive evaluation of MMS, multidisciplinary collaboration, adherence to investigation and validation protocols, transparency and traceability requirements, and guiding standards and frameworks that enhance documentation efforts and support the translation of AI- and ML-based MMS.
CONCLUSIONS: Resolving barriers to translation is critical for MMS to deliver on expectations, including those barriers identified in this scoping review related to bias, accountability, governance, and explainability. Our findings suggest that transparent strategic documentation, aligning translational science and regulatory science, will support the translation of MMS by coordinating communication and reporting and reducing translational barriers, thereby furthering the adoption of MMS.

Partial Information Decomposition (PID) is a body of work within information theory that allows one to quantify the information that several random variables provide about another random variable, either individually (unique information), redundantly (shared information), or only jointly (synergistic information). This review article aims to provide a survey of some recent and emerging applications of partial information decomposition in algorithmic fairness and explainability, which are of immense importance given the growing use of machine learning in high-stakes applications. For instance, PID, in conjunction with causality, has enabled the disentanglement of the non-exempt disparity which is the part of the overall disparity that is not due to critical job necessities. Similarly, in federated learning, PID has enabled the quantification of tradeoffs between local and global disparities. We introduce a taxonomy that highlights the role of PID in algorithmic fairness and explainability in three main avenues: (i) Quantifying the legally non-exempt disparity for auditing or training; (ii) Explaining contributions of various features or data points; and (iii) Formalizing tradeoffs among different disparities in federated learning. Lastly, we also review techniques for the estimation of PID measures, as well as discuss some challenges and future directions.

Neuro-robots are a class of autonomous machines that, in their architecture, mimic aspects of the human brain and cognition. As such, they represent unique artifacts created by humans based on human understanding of healthy human brains. European Union\'s Convention on Roboethics 2025 states that the design of all robots (including neuro-robots) must include provisions for the complete traceability of the robots\' actions, analogous to an aircraft\'s flight data recorder. At the same time, one can anticipate rising instances of neuro-robotic failure, as they operate on imperfect data in real environments, and the underlying AI behind such neuro-robots has yet to achieve explainability. This paper reviews the trajectory of the technology used in neuro-robots and accompanying failures. The failures demand an explanation. While drawing on existing explainable AI research, we argue explainability in AI limits the same in neuro-robots. In order to make robots more explainable, we suggest potential pathways for future research.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is being applied in medicine to improve healthcare and advance health equity. The application of AI-based technologies in radiology is expected to improve diagnostic performance by increasing accuracy and simplifying personalized decision-making. While this technology has the potential to improve health services, many ethical and societal implications need to be carefully considered to avoid harmful consequences for individuals and groups, especially for the most vulnerable populations. Therefore, several questions are raised, including (1) what types of ethical issues are raised by the use of AI in medicine and biomedical research, and (2) how are these issues being tackled in radiology, especially in the case of breast cancer? To answer these questions, a systematic review of the academic literature was conducted. Searches were performed in five electronic databases to identify peer-reviewed articles published since 2017 on the topic of the ethics of AI in radiology. The review results show that the discourse has mainly addressed expectations and challenges associated with medical AI, and in particular bias and black box issues, and that various guiding principles have been suggested to ensure ethical AI. We found that several ethical and societal implications of AI use remain underexplored, and more attention needs to be paid to addressing potential discriminatory effects and injustices. We conclude with a critical reflection on these issues and the identified gaps in the discourse from a philosophical and STS perspective, underlining the need to integrate a social science perspective in AI developments in radiology in the future.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a useful aid in numerous clinical applications for diagnosis and treatment decisions. Deep neural networks have shown the same or better performance than clinicians in many tasks owing to the rapid increase in the available data and computational power. In order to conform to the principles of trustworthy AI, it is essential that the AI system be transparent, robust, fair, and ensure accountability. Current deep neural solutions are referred to as black-boxes due to a lack of understanding of the specifics concerning the decision-making process. Therefore, there is a need to ensure the interpretability of deep neural networks before they can be incorporated into the routine clinical workflow. In this narrative review, we utilized systematic keyword searches and domain expertise to identify nine different types of interpretability methods that have been used for understanding deep learning models for medical image analysis applications based on the type of generated explanations and technical similarities. Furthermore, we report the progress made towards evaluating the explanations produced by various interpretability methods. Finally, we discuss limitations, provide guidelines for using interpretability methods and future directions concerning the interpretability of deep neural networks for medical imaging analysis.

The development of medical imaging artificial intelligence (AI) systems for evaluating COVID-19 patients has demonstrated potential for improving clinical decision making and assessing patient outcomes during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. These have been applied to many medical imaging tasks, including disease diagnosis and patient prognosis, as well as augmented other clinical measurements to better inform treatment decisions. Because these systems are used in life-or-death decisions, clinical implementation relies on user trust in the AI output. This has caused many developers to utilize explainability techniques in an attempt to help a user understand when an AI algorithm is likely to succeed as well as which cases may be problematic for automatic assessment, thus increasing the potential for rapid clinical translation. AI application to COVID-19 has been marred with controversy recently. This review discusses several aspects of explainable and interpretable AI as it pertains to the evaluation of COVID-19 disease and it can restore trust in AI application to this disease. This includes the identification of common tasks that are relevant to explainable medical imaging AI, an overview of several modern approaches for producing explainable output as appropriate for a given imaging scenario, a discussion of how to evaluate explainable AI, and recommendations for best practices in explainable/interpretable AI implementation. This review will allow developers of AI systems for COVID-19 to quickly understand the basics of several explainable AI techniques and assist in the selection of an approach that is both appropriate and effective for a given scenario.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has recently altered the landscape of cancer research and medical oncology using traditional Machine Learning (ML) algorithms and cutting-edge Deep Learning (DL) architectures. In this review article we focus on the ML aspect of AI applications in cancer research and present the most indicative studies with respect to the ML algorithms and data used. The PubMed and dblp databases were considered to obtain the most relevant research works of the last five years. Based on a comparison of the proposed studies and their research clinical outcomes concerning the medical ML application in cancer research, three main clinical scenarios were identified. We give an overview of the well-known DL and Reinforcement Learning (RL) methodologies, as well as their application in clinical practice, and we briefly discuss Systems Biology in cancer research. We also provide a thorough examination of the clinical scenarios with respect to disease diagnosis, patient classification and cancer prognosis and survival. The most relevant studies identified in the preceding year are presented along with their primary findings. Furthermore, we examine the effective implementation and the main points that need to be addressed in the direction of robustness, explainability and transparency of predictive models. Finally, we summarize the most recent advances in the field of AI/ML applications in cancer research and medical oncology, as well as some of the challenges and open issues that need to be addressed before data-driven models can be implemented in healthcare systems to assist physicians in their daily practice.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have led to its widespread industrial adoption, with machine learning systems demonstrating superhuman performance in a significant number of tasks. However, this surge in performance, has often been achieved through increased model complexity, turning such systems into \"black box\" approaches and causing uncertainty regarding the way they operate and, ultimately, the way that they come to decisions. This ambiguity has made it problematic for machine learning systems to be adopted in sensitive yet critical domains, where their value could be immense, such as healthcare. As a result, scientific interest in the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), a field that is concerned with the development of new methods that explain and interpret machine learning models, has been tremendously reignited over recent years. This study focuses on machine learning interpretability methods; more specifically, a literature review and taxonomy of these methods are presented, as well as links to their programming implementations, in the hope that this survey would serve as a reference point for both theorists and practitioners.