Essential Work Sample Exercises for Evaluating AI Explainability Framework Skills

As artificial intelligence systems become increasingly complex and widespread, the need for explainability has never been more critical. AI explainability frameworks help organizations understand, interpret, and communicate how their AI systems make decisions, addressing concerns around transparency, bias, and regulatory compliance. Professionals skilled in developing these frameworks are invaluable assets to any organization deploying AI solutions.

Evaluating a candidate's ability to develop AI explainability frameworks requires more than just theoretical knowledge assessment. Practical work samples provide a window into how candidates approach real-world explainability challenges, their technical implementation skills, and their ability to communicate complex concepts to diverse stakeholders. These exercises reveal a candidate's problem-solving approach, technical depth, and understanding of the ethical implications of AI systems.

The following work samples are designed to evaluate a candidate's proficiency in developing AI explainability frameworks from multiple angles. They assess technical knowledge, practical implementation skills, communication abilities, and critical thinking. By observing candidates complete these exercises, hiring managers can gain valuable insights into how candidates would perform in the actual role.

Implementing these exercises as part of your interview process will help identify candidates who not only understand AI explainability in theory but can also apply these concepts effectively in practice. This comprehensive evaluation approach leads to better hiring decisions and ultimately stronger AI governance within your organization.

Activity #1: Explainability Framework Design

This activity evaluates a candidate's ability to design a comprehensive explainability framework for a specific AI system. It tests their understanding of different explainability techniques, their applicability to various models, and the candidate's ability to create a structured approach to AI transparency. This exercise reveals how candidates think about explainability holistically and how they would approach implementing it in a real-world scenario.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a brief description of a fictional AI system that requires explainability (e.g., a loan approval system, a medical diagnosis assistant, or a hiring recommendation tool).
• Include details about the model type (e.g., neural network, random forest, ensemble), the data it uses, and the stakeholders who need to understand its decisions.
• Provide the candidate with this description at least 24 hours before the interview.
• Allocate 20-25 minutes for the candidate to present their framework design and 10 minutes for questions.
• Prepare questions that probe the candidate's reasoning behind their framework choices.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Design a comprehensive explainability framework for the AI system described.
• Your framework should include:
• Recommended explainability techniques and tools
• Implementation approach and integration points
• Metrics to evaluate explainability effectiveness
• Considerations for different stakeholders (technical and non-technical)
• Potential challenges and mitigation strategies
• Prepare a 20-minute presentation explaining your framework design.
• Be prepared to justify your choices and discuss alternatives.

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the presentation, provide feedback on one aspect the candidate handled well (e.g., "Your consideration of regulatory requirements was thorough").
• Provide one area for improvement (e.g., "Your framework could better address how to explain model decisions to non-technical users").
• Give the candidate 5-10 minutes to revise their approach based on this feedback, focusing specifically on the improvement area.

Activity #2: Implementing LIME or SHAP for Model Interpretation

This hands-on exercise tests the candidate's ability to implement popular explainability techniques like LIME (Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations) or SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations). It evaluates their technical skills, familiarity with explainability libraries, and ability to generate meaningful interpretations from complex models. This activity reveals the candidate's practical implementation skills and their understanding of how to extract and present model insights.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a Jupyter notebook with a pre-trained machine learning model (e.g., a classification model trained on a public dataset like MNIST, Census Income, or Credit Default).
• Include the dataset, model, and basic code structure, but leave the explainability implementation for the candidate.
• Provide access to necessary libraries (e.g., LIME, SHAP, matplotlib).
• Allow 45-60 minutes for this exercise.
• Consider conducting this as a take-home exercise if time constraints are an issue.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Using the provided notebook and pre-trained model, implement either LIME or SHAP (or both if time permits) to explain individual predictions.
• Generate visualizations that effectively communicate the model's decision-making process.
• Write a brief explanation (2-3 paragraphs) of what the results reveal about the model's behavior.
• Identify any potential biases or unexpected patterns in the model's decision-making.
• Be prepared to walk through your implementation and explain your code choices.

Feedback Mechanism:

• Provide feedback on the technical implementation (e.g., "Your SHAP implementation effectively highlighted the key features").
• Suggest one improvement area (e.g., "The visualizations could be more intuitive for non-technical stakeholders").
• Allow the candidate 10-15 minutes to refine their implementation or visualizations based on the feedback.

Activity #3: Translating Technical Explainability for Business Stakeholders

This activity assesses the candidate's ability to communicate complex technical concepts to non-technical stakeholders. Effective explainability isn't just about generating technical explanations but making them accessible and actionable for diverse audiences. This exercise reveals the candidate's communication skills and their ability to bridge the gap between technical implementation and business value.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a technical report containing model explainability outputs (e.g., feature importance plots, SHAP values, partial dependence plots).
• Create profiles for 2-3 fictional stakeholders with different backgrounds (e.g., a compliance officer, a product manager, a customer service representative).
• Provide these materials to the candidate 24 hours before the interview.
• Allocate 30 minutes for the candidate to present their communications.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the provided technical explainability report.
• Prepare communication materials tailored to each stakeholder profile that explain:
• What the model is doing
• How confident we can be in its decisions
• What factors influence its predictions
• What actions the stakeholder might take based on this information
• Your deliverables should include different formats appropriate for each stakeholder (e.g., executive summary, visual dashboard, talking points).
• Focus on making the technical information accessible without oversimplifying.

Feedback Mechanism:

• Provide feedback on the effectiveness of the communication for one stakeholder profile (e.g., "Your executive summary effectively highlighted the business implications").
• Suggest one improvement area (e.g., "The compliance officer would need more specific information about how the model addresses fairness concerns").
• Give the candidate 10 minutes to revise their communication approach for that specific stakeholder.

Activity #4: Evaluating and Improving an Existing Explainability Approach

This activity tests the candidate's critical thinking and ability to evaluate and enhance existing explainability solutions. It assesses their understanding of explainability limitations and their problem-solving skills when faced with real-world constraints. This exercise reveals how candidates approach improvement and innovation in the explainability space.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare a case study of an AI system with an existing but flawed explainability approach.
• Include details about:
• The current explainability methods being used
• Stakeholder complaints or concerns about the explanations
• Technical constraints of the system
• Regulatory or business requirements for explainability
• Provide these materials to the candidate at least 24 hours before the interview.
• Allocate 45 minutes for discussion and solution development.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the case study materials.
• Identify the key limitations or gaps in the current explainability approach.
• Develop a proposal to improve the explainability framework that addresses:
• Technical enhancements to the explainability methods
• Process improvements for generating and validating explanations
• Better alignment with stakeholder needs
• Implementation considerations and potential challenges
• Be prepared to discuss your analysis and recommendations in detail.

Feedback Mechanism:

• Provide feedback on the candidate's analysis of the limitations (e.g., "You effectively identified the key gaps in the current approach").
• Suggest one area where their solution could be enhanced (e.g., "Your proposal could better address the computational efficiency concerns").
• Give the candidate 15 minutes to refine their approach based on this feedback.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long should we allocate for these exercises in our interview process?

These exercises can be adapted to your time constraints. For a comprehensive assessment, consider spreading them across multiple interview stages or selecting the 2-3 most relevant to your specific needs. Activity #2 works well as a take-home exercise, while Activities #1, #3, and #4 are more effective in live settings.

Do candidates need access to specific tools or software for these exercises?

For Activity #2, candidates will need access to Python and relevant libraries (LIME, SHAP, etc.). Consider providing a cloud-based notebook environment or clear instructions for setting up a local environment. The other activities primarily require presentation software and document creation tools.

How technical should we expect the candidates' responses to be?

This depends on the specific role. For more technical positions, expect detailed implementation knowledge in Activity #2. For roles focused on framework design or stakeholder communication, emphasize Activities #1 and #3. Adjust your evaluation criteria based on the role's requirements.

Can these exercises be adapted for candidates with different levels of experience?

Yes. For junior candidates, provide more structure and guidance, particularly for Activities #1 and #4. For senior candidates, introduce additional constraints or complexity, such as regulatory requirements or resource limitations, to test their strategic thinking.

How should we evaluate candidates who propose approaches different from what we currently use?

Novel approaches should be evaluated on their merit, not on alignment with your current methods. Look for sound reasoning, awareness of trade-offs, and practical implementation considerations. Different approaches might bring valuable new perspectives to your explainability practices.

Should we share our current explainability frameworks with candidates?

It's generally better not to share your specific implementations to avoid biasing candidates' responses. However, you can share high-level information about your AI systems and explainability needs to help candidates tailor their responses to your context.

AI explainability is a rapidly evolving field that requires a unique blend of technical expertise, communication skills, and ethical awareness. By incorporating these work samples into your hiring process, you'll be better equipped to identify candidates who can develop robust, effective explainability frameworks for your organization's AI systems.

The right talent in this area will not only help your organization meet regulatory requirements but also build trust with users and stakeholders through transparent, interpretable AI systems. As AI becomes more deeply integrated into critical business processes, the ability to explain how these systems work becomes not just a technical requirement but a business imperative.

For more resources to enhance your hiring process, check out Yardstick's AI Job Descriptions, AI Interview Question Generator, and AI Interview Guide Generator.

Build a complete interview guide for evaluating AI explainability framework skills by signing up for a free Yardstick account