mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A study on the Interpretability of Neural Retrieval Models using DeepSHAP

arXiv 1907.06484 ↗First posted 15 Jul 2019cs.IR cs.LGcited by 19

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A recent trend in IR has been the usage of neural networks to learn retrieval models for text based adhoc search. While various approaches and architectures have yielded significantly better performance than traditional retrieval models such as BM25, it is still difficult to understand exactly why a document is relevant to a query. In the ML community several approaches for explaining decisions made by deep neural networks have been proposed -- including DeepSHAP which modifies the DeepLift algorithm to estimate the relative importance (shapley values) of input features for a given decision by comparing the activations in the network for a given image against the activations caused by a reference input. In image classification, the reference input tends to be a plain black image. While DeepSHAP has been well studied for image classification tasks, it remains to be seen how we can adapt it to explain the output of Neural Retrieval Models (NRMs). In particular, what is a good "black" image in the context of IR? In this paper we explored various reference input document construction techniques. Additionally, we compared the explanations generated by DeepSHAP to LIME (a model agnostic approach) and found that the explanations differ considerably. Our study raises concerns regarding the robustness and accuracy of explanations produced for NRMs. With this paper we aim to shed light on interesting problems surrounding interpretability in NRMs and highlight areas of future work.

Key facts. Cited by 19 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2019.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 4; 2023: 3; 2024: 6; 2025: 0; 2026: 4.

19 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2022From Anecdotal Evidence to Quantitative Evaluation Methods: A Systematic Review on Evaluating Explainable AIcited by 302
  2. 2024Towards Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): A Data Mining Perspectivecited by 9
  3. 2022Rank-LIME: Local Model-Agnostic Feature Attribution for Learning to Rankcited by 7
  4. 2023Query Understanding in the Age of Large Language Modelscited by 7
  5. 2021Axiomatic Explanations for Visual Search, Retrieval, and Similarity Learningcited by 6
  6. 2022Diagnosing BERT with Retrieval Heuristicscited by 5
  7. 2023Explain like I am BM25: Interpreting a Dense Model's Ranked-List with a Sparse Approximationcited by 5
  8. 2021FaxPlainAC: A Fact-Checking Tool Based on EXPLAINable Models with HumAn Correction in the Loopcited by 4
  9. 2024RankSHAP: Shapley Value Based Feature Attributions for Learning to Rankcited by 4
  10. 2024ShaRP: Explaining Rankings and Preferences with Shapley Valuescited by 3
  11. 2023ExaRanker: Explanation-Augmented Neural Rankercited by 2
  12. 2024AdaptGrad: Adaptive Sampling to Reduce Noisecited by 2
7 more
  1. 2024Probing Ranking LLMs: A Mechanistic Analysis for Information Retrievalcited by 2
  2. 2022Explainability of Text Processing and Retrieval Methods: A Surveycited by 0
  3. 2024Axiomatization of Gradient Smoothing in Neural Networkscited by 0
  4. 2026Quantifying Retriever-Generator Alignment in RAG with Local Explanationscited by 0
  5. 2026Enhancing AI Interpretability with Localised Architecturescited by 0
  6. 2026A unified framework for global and local interpretability using adaptive derivative-ordered random explanationcited by 0
  7. 2026Mapping the RAG Landscape: A Four Axis Taxonomy of Efficiency, Defense, Interactivity, and Reasoningcited by 0