Skip to content
AI Atlas

Data storytelling meets interpretable machine learning: Decoding AI decisions for non-experts without revealing sensitive data and model details

Published 16 Sept 2026arXiv:2609.15722

data quality89

Updated 12 h ago · first seen 15 Sept 2026

paper_01M2JK0CXM00NVFJ87DW1W8AT5

Abstract

AI-driven automated decision-making requires both predictive performance and interpretability. Recent advances in interpretable machine learning (IML) provide tools for explaining model predictions, but the technical complexity of these explanations may hinder accessibility to non-experts. To address this challenge, this study integrates data storytelling with IML to enhance the explainability of AI-generated decisions for a broader audience. Following the design science research (DSR) paradigm, this study proposes a formal definition of data storytelling in IML, introduces the DIST Pyramid to align data storytelling with IML, and presents the I-P-O Model to describe their interactions. It further develops an architecture to explain AI decisions through distinct "What-if" and "Why-not" event-generation processes. The architecture also employs data desensitization to protect sensitive input data. To validate the approach, a case study is conducted with the Boston Housing dataset, using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values and large language models (LLMs) to generate data stories with And-But-Therefore (ABT) structures. An empirical evaluation shows that 76.4% and 74.3% of respondents rated the "What-if" and "Why-not" data stories as more comprehensible, with significantly higher accessibility scores than traditional SHAP visualizations. The paper concludes with the presentation of a narrative interpretation framework that integrates IML and data storytelling, thereby expanding the research scope as well as the practical applicability of AI decision-making.

Authors

Authors 5

Anran FangLemen ChaoMing LeiMingran SunZixuan Yang

Linked names open researcher pages (created from the paper's author list; name-only, no affiliation unless a source states it). Unlinked names have no researcher record yet.

Organizations

Organizations 0

No organization stated. arXiv metadata does not carry affiliations; an organization is linked only when a model card or lab page cites the paper.

Models

Models introduced or described 0

Inbound described_by relations from model cards and documentation.

No model links this paper yet

Model pages link papers through their model cards and documentation; the relation is written only when a source states it.

Datasets

Datasets used 0

No dataset relation recorded.

Benchmarks

Benchmarks used 0

No benchmark relation recorded.

Code

Repositories & frameworks 0

No repository linked.

Timeline

Timeline 3

Full timeline →

Sources

Sources 2

Source documents
SourceDocumentTypeTierLast observedSnapshots
arXiv (Atom API + RSS)rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.AI feedT1· Official12 h ago5
arXiv (Atom API + RSS)rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.LG feedT1· Official12 h ago4

Tier 1 = official/primary, 2 = quality secondary, 3 = community, 4 = unverified. Every snapshot is archived; see all sources and the methodology.