mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Cross-Model Consensus of Explanations and Beyond for Image Classification Models: An Empirical Study

arXiv 2109.00707 ↗First posted 2 Sep 2021cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Existing interpretation algorithms have found that, even deep models make the same and right predictions on the same image, they might rely on different sets of input features for classification. However, among these sets of features, some common features might be used by the majority of models. In this paper, we are wondering what are the common features used by various models for classification and whether the models with better performance may favor those common features. For this purpose, our works uses an interpretation algorithm to attribute the importance of features (e.g., pixels or superpixels) as explanations, and proposes the cross-model consensus of explanations to capture the common features. Specifically, we first prepare a set of deep models as a committee, then deduce the explanation for every model, and obtain the consensus of explanations across the entire committee through voting. With the cross-model consensus of explanations, we conduct extensive experiments using 80+ models on 5 datasets/tasks. We find three interesting phenomena as follows: (1) the consensus obtained from image classification models is aligned with the ground truth of semantic segmentation; (2) we measure the similarity of the explanation result of each model in the committee to the consensus (namely consensus score), and find positive correlations between the consensus score and model performance; and (3) the consensus score coincidentally correlates to the interpretability.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 57 of its 75 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Sep 2021.

Builds on

57 of 75 references.

References · 57

  1. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  2. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
  3. 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,691
  4. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
  5. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  6. 2019EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 6,415
  7. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  8. 2015You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detectioncited by 4,829
  9. 2018MobileNetV2: Inverted Residuals and Linear Bottleneckscited by 4,773
  10. 2017Squeeze-and-Excitation Networkscited by 4,763
  11. 2014Going Deeper with Convolutionscited by 4,231
  12. 2017MobileNets: Efficient Convolutional Neural Networks for Mobile Vision Applicationscited by 3,827
38 more
  1. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  2. 2018YOLOv3: An Incremental Improvementcited by 2,652
  3. 2016Aggregated Residual Transformations for Deep Neural Networkscited by 2,540
  4. 2015Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localizationcited by 2,430
  5. 2016Xception: Deep Learning with Depthwise Separable Convolutionscited by 2,320
  6. 2019Searching for MobileNetV3cited by 1,984
  7. 2018DARTS: Differentiable Architecture Searchcited by 1,782
  8. 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,714
  9. 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,454
  10. 2019Deep High-Resolution Representation Learning for Visual Recognitioncited by 1,417
  11. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  12. 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,309
  13. 2017ShuffleNet: An Extremely Efficient Convolutional Neural Network for Mobile Devicescited by 1,194
  14. 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
  15. 2018ShuffleNet V2: Practical Guidelines for Efficient CNN Architecture Designcited by 1,132
  16. 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
  17. 2016SqueezeNet: AlexNet-level accuracy with 50x fewer parameters and <0.5MB model sizecited by 1,054
  18. 2017BadNets: Identifying Vulnerabilities in the Machine Learning Model Supply Chaincited by 1,052
  19. 2017Targeted Backdoor Attacks on Deep Learning Systems Using Data Poisoningcited by 1,012
  20. 2017Grad-CAM++: Improved Visual Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networkscited by 936
  21. 2018RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Modelscited by 825
  22. 2018This Looks Like That: Deep Learning for Interpretable Image Recognitioncited by 731
  23. 2017Network Dissection: Quantifying Interpretability of Deep Visual Representationscited by 703
  24. 2019Score-CAM: Score-Weighted Visual Explanations for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 575
  25. 2019Res2Net: A New Multi-scale Backbone Architecturecited by 468
  26. 2018A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networkscited by 467
  27. 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
  28. 2018All Models are Wrong, but Many are Useful: Learning a Variable's Importance by Studying an Entire Class of Prediction Models Simultaneouslycited by 364
  29. 2019On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanationscited by 309
  30. 2020Self-supervised Equivariant Attention Mechanism for Weakly Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 299
  31. 2020Puzzle Mix: Exploiting Saliency and Local Statistics for Optimal Mixupcited by 260
  32. 2017Improving the Adversarial Robustness and Interpretability of Deep Neural Networks by Regularizing their Input Gradientscited by 236
  33. 2013OverFeat: Integrated Recognition, Localization and Detection using Convolutional Networkscited by 224
  34. 2019Interpretable Counterfactual Explanations Guided by Prototypescited by 223
  35. 2019ACNet: Strengthening the Kernel Skeletons for Powerful CNN via Asymmetric Convolution Blockscited by 178
  36. 2020Generating Fact Checking Explanationscited by 132
  37. 2017Dual Path Networkscited by 119
  38. 2018Interpreting CNNs via Decision Treescited by 89

50 most cited of 57 All 57 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 2.

6 papers.