From Features to Actions: Explainability in Traditional and Agentic AI Systems

Over the last decade, explainable AI has primarily focused on interpreting individual model predictions, producing post-hoc explanations that relate inputs to outputs under a fixed decision structure. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have enabled agentic AI systems whose behaviour unfolds over multi-step trajectories. In these settings, success and failure are determined by sequences of decisions rather than a single output. While useful, it remains unclear how explanation approaches designed for static predictions translate to agentic settings where behaviour emerges over time. In this work, we bridge the gap between static and agentic explainability by comparing attribution-based explanations with trace-based diagnostics across both settings. To make this distinction explicit, we empirically compare attribution-based explanations used in static classification tasks with trace-based diagnostics used in agentic benchmarks (TAU-bench Airline and AssistantBench). Our results show that while attribution methods achieve stable feature rankings in static settings (Spearman $ρ= 0.86$), they cannot be applied reliably to diagnose execution-level failures in agentic trajectories. In contrast, trace-grounded rubric evaluation for agentic settings consistently localizes behaviour breakdowns and reveals that state tracking inconsistency is 2.7$\times$ more prevalent in failed runs and reduces success probability by 49\%. These findings motivate a shift towards trajectory-level explainability for agentic systems when evaluating and diagnosing autonomous AI behaviour. Resources: https://github.com/VectorInstitute/unified-xai-evaluation-framework https://vectorinstitute.github.io/unified-xai-evaluation-framework

Automatically Detecting Amusing Games in Wordle

We explore automatically predicting which Wordle games Reddit users find amusing. We scrape approximately 80k reactions by Reddit users to Wordle games from Reddit, classify the reactions as expressing amusement or not using OpenAI's GPT-3.5 using few-shot prompting, and verify that GPT-3.5's labels roughly correspond to human labels. We then extract features from Wordle games that can predict user amusement. We demonstrate that the features indeed provide a (weak) signal that predicts user amusement as predicted by GPT-3.5. Our results indicate that user amusement at Wordle games can be predicted computationally to some extent. We explore which features of the game contribute to user amusement. We find that user amusement is predictable, indicating a measurable aspect of creativity infused into Wordle games through humor.