Considering Likelihood in NLP Classification Explanations with Occlusion and Language Modeling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recently, state-of-the-art NLP models gained an increasing syntactic and semantic understanding of language, and explanation methods are crucial to understand their decisions. Occlusion is a well established method that provides explanations on discrete language data, e.g. by removing a language unit from an input and measuring the impact on a model's decision. We argue that current occlusion-based methods often produce invalid or syntactically incorrect language data, neglecting the improved abilities of recent NLP models. Furthermore, gradient-based explanation methods disregard the discrete distribution of data in NLP. Thus, we propose OLM: a novel explanation method that combines occlusion and language models to sample valid and syntactically correct replacements with high likelihood, given the context of the original input. We lay out a theoretical foundation that alleviates these weaknesses of other explanation methods in NLP and provide results that underline the importance of considering data likelihood in occlusion-based explanation.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 21 Apr 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 7; 2022: 2; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
11 papers.
- 2021Connecting Attributions and QA Model Behavior on Realistic Counterfactualscited by 20
- 2022Necessity and Sufficiency for Explaining Text Classifiers: A Case Study in Hate Speech Detectioncited by 18
- 2021PredDiff: Explanations and Interactions from Conditional Expectationscited by 17
- 2021Token-Modification Adversarial Attacks for Natural Language Processing: A Surveycited by 12
- 2021Efficient Explanations from Empirical Explainerscited by 9
- 2021Double Trouble: How to not explain a text classifier's decisions using counterfactuals synthesized by masked language models?cited by 5
- 2021Adv-OLM: Generating Textual Adversaries via OLMcited by 2
- 2021Explaining Natural Language Processing Classifiers with Occlusion and Language Modelingcited by 2
- 2022XPASC: Measuring Generalization in Weak Supervision by Explainability and Associationcited by 1
- 2026What Do Agents Communicate? Characterizing Information Exchange in Multi-Agent Systemscited by 1
- 2024Empowering Prior to Court Legal Analysis: A Transparent and Accessible Dataset for Defensive Statement Classification and Interpretationcited by 0
- 2026What Do Agents Communicate? Characterizing Information Exchange in Multi-Agent Systems19 May 2026
- 2024Empowering Prior to Court Legal Analysis: A Transparent and Accessible Dataset for Defensive Statement Classification and Interpretation17 May 2024
- 2022XPASC: Measuring Generalization in Weak Supervision by Explainability and Association3 Jun 2022
- 2022Necessity and Sufficiency for Explaining Text Classifiers: A Case Study in Hate Speech Detection6 May 2022
- 2021Double Trouble: How to not explain a text classifier's decisions using counterfactuals synthesized by masked language models?22 Oct 2021
- 2021Connecting Attributions and QA Model Behavior on Realistic Counterfactuals9 Apr 2021
- 2021Efficient Explanations from Empirical Explainers29 Mar 2021
- 2021Token-Modification Adversarial Attacks for Natural Language Processing: A Survey1 Mar 2021
- 2021PredDiff: Explanations and Interactions from Conditional Expectations26 Feb 2021
- 2021Explaining Natural Language Processing Classifiers with Occlusion and Language Modeling28 Jan 2021
- 2021Adv-OLM: Generating Textual Adversaries via OLM21 Jan 2021