Pair the Dots: Jointly Examining Training History and Test Stimuli for Model Interpretability
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Any prediction from a model is made by a combination of learning history and test stimuli. This provides significant insights for improving model interpretability: it because of which part(s) of which training example(s), the model attends to which part(s) of a test example. Unfortunately, existing methods to interpret a model's predictions are only able to capture a single aspect of either test stimuli or learning history, and evidences from both are never combined or integrated. In this paper, we propose an efficient and differentiable approach to make it feasible to interpret a model's prediction by jointly examining training history and test stimuli. Test stimuli is first identified by gradient-based methods, signifying it the part of a test example that the model attends to. The gradient-based saliency scores are then propagated to training examples using influence functions to identify it which part(s) of which training example(s) make the model attends to the test stimuli. The system is differentiable and time efficient: the adoption of saliency scores from gradient-based methods allows us to efficiently trace a model's prediction through test stimuli, and then back to training examples through influence functions. We demonstrate that the proposed methodology offers clear explanations about neural model decisions, along with being useful for performing error analysis, crafting adversarial examples and fixing erroneously classified examples.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 1; 2023: 2; 2024: 1.
7 papers.
- 2022An Empirical Study of Memorization in NLPcited by 21
- 2021Interpreting Deep Learning Models in Natural Language Processing: A Reviewcited by 19
- 2023How do languages influence each other? Studying cross-lingual data sharing during LM fine-tuningcited by 14
- 2023Examining Modularity in Multilingual LMs via Language-Specialized Subnetworkscited by 13
- 2021On Sample Based Explanation Methods for NLP:Efficiency, Faithfulness, and Semantic Evaluationcited by 12
- 2024The Echoes of Multilinguality: Tracing Cultural Value Shifts during LM Fine-tuningcited by 10
- 2021A General Framework for Defending Against Backdoor Attacks via Influence Graphcited by 3
- 2024The Echoes of Multilinguality: Tracing Cultural Value Shifts during LM Fine-tuning21 May 2024
- 2023Examining Modularity in Multilingual LMs via Language-Specialized Subnetworks14 Nov 2023
- 2023How do languages influence each other? Studying cross-lingual data sharing during LM fine-tuning22 May 2023
- 2022An Empirical Study of Memorization in NLP23 Mar 2022
- 2021A General Framework for Defending Against Backdoor Attacks via Influence Graph29 Nov 2021
- 2021Interpreting Deep Learning Models in Natural Language Processing: A Review20 Oct 2021
- 2021On Sample Based Explanation Methods for NLP:Efficiency, Faithfulness, and Semantic Evaluation9 Jun 2021