Evaluating Input Perturbation Methods for Interpreting CNNs and Saliency Map Comparison
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Input perturbation methods occlude parts of an input to a function and measure the change in the function's output. Recently, input perturbation methods have been applied to generate and evaluate saliency maps from convolutional neural networks. In practice, neutral baseline images are used for the occlusion, such that the baseline image's impact on the classification probability is minimal. However, in this paper we show that arguably neutral baseline images still impact the generated saliency maps and their evaluation with input perturbations. We also demonstrate that many choices of hyperparameters lead to the divergence of saliency maps generated by input perturbations. We experimentally reveal inconsistencies among a selection of input perturbation methods and find that they lack robustness for generating saliency maps and for evaluating saliency maps as saliency metrics.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jan 2021.
Builds on
11 of 17 references.
References · 11
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,278
- 2018RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Modelscited by 825
- 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 611
- 2018A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networkscited by 467
- 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
- 2017Real Time Image Saliency for Black Box Classifierscited by 246
- 2019Sanity Checks for Saliency Metricscited by 119
- 2017Towards better understanding of gradient-based attribution methods for Deep Neural Networkscited by 51
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 1.
7 papers.
- 2023The Meta-Evaluation Problem in Explainable AI: Identifying Reliable Estimators with MetaQuantuscited by 37
- 2022New Definitions and Evaluations for Saliency Methods: Staying Intrinsic, Complete and Soundcited by 10
- 2021Believe The HiPe: Hierarchical Perturbation for Fast, Robust, and Model-Agnostic Saliency Mappingcited by 5
- 2024On the Evaluation Consistency of Attribution-based Explanationscited by 5
- 2024From Flexibility to Manipulation: The Slippery Slope of XAI Evaluationcited by 4
- 2022BOREx: Bayesian-Optimization--Based Refinement of Saliency Map for Image- and Video-Classification Modelscited by 1
- 2025Evaluate with the Inverse: Efficient Approximation of Latent Explanation Quality Distributioncited by 0
- 2025Evaluate with the Inverse: Efficient Approximation of Latent Explanation Quality Distribution21 Feb 2025
- 2024From Flexibility to Manipulation: The Slippery Slope of XAI Evaluation7 Dec 2024
- 2024On the Evaluation Consistency of Attribution-based Explanations28 Jul 2024
- 2023The Meta-Evaluation Problem in Explainable AI: Identifying Reliable Estimators with MetaQuantus14 Feb 2023
- 2022New Definitions and Evaluations for Saliency Methods: Staying Intrinsic, Complete and Sound5 Nov 2022
- 2022BOREx: Bayesian-Optimization--Based Refinement of Saliency Map for Image- and Video-Classification Models31 Oct 2022
- 2021Believe The HiPe: Hierarchical Perturbation for Fast, Robust, and Model-Agnostic Saliency Mapping22 Feb 2021