Defense Against Explanation Manipulation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Explainable machine learning attracts increasing attention as it improves transparency of models, which is helpful for machine learning to be trusted in real applications. However, explanation methods have recently been demonstrated to be vulnerable to manipulation, where we can easily change a model's explanation while keeping its prediction constant. To tackle this problem, some efforts have been paid to use more stable explanation methods or to change model configurations. In this work, we tackle the problem from the training perspective, and propose a new training scheme called Adversarial Training on EXplanations (ATEX) to improve the internal explanation stability of a model regardless of the specific explanation method being applied. Instead of directly specifying explanation values over data instances, ATEX only puts requirement on model predictions which avoids involving second-order derivatives in optimization. As a further discussion, we also find that explanation stability is closely related to another property of the model, i.e., the risk of being exposed to adversarial attack. Through experiments, besides showing that ATEX improves model robustness against manipulation targeting explanation, it also brings additional benefits including smoothing explanations and improving the efficacy of adversarial training if applied to the model.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Nov 2021.
Builds on
31 of 37 references.
References · 31
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
- 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,976
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
- 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,454
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
- 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
19 more
- 2017Grad-CAM++: Improved Visual Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networkscited by 936
- 2016Adversarial Machine Learning at Scalecited by 934
- 2016Universal adversarial perturbationscited by 774
- 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 716
- 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 611
- 2018Towards Robust Interpretability with Self-Explaining Neural Networkscited by 505
- 2017Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragilecited by 443
- 2017The (Un)reliability of saliency methodscited by 331
- 2018On the Robustness of Interpretability Methodscited by 310
- 2019On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanationscited by 309
- 2019Fooling automated surveillance cameras: adversarial patches to attack person detectioncited by 268
- 2018Techniques for Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 237
- 2017Improving the Adversarial Robustness and Interpretability of Deep Neural Networks by Regularizing their Input Gradientscited by 236
- 2019Explanations can be manipulated and geometry is to blamecited by 215
- 2019Fooling Neural Network Interpretations via Adversarial Model Manipulationcited by 112
- 2019Regularizing Black-box Models for Improved Interpretabilitycited by 35
- 2019Certifiably Robust Interpretation in Deep Learningcited by 35
- 2019Regional Tree Regularization for Interpretability in Black Box Modelscited by 14
- 2020Trustworthy Convolutional Neural Networks: A Gradient Penalized-based Approachcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 1.
6 papers.
- 2023Adversarial attacks and defenses in explainable artificial intelligence: A surveycited by 47
- 2022SAFARI: Versatile and Efficient Evaluations for Robustness of Interpretabilitycited by 28
- 2022Towards More Robust Interpretation via Local Gradient Alignmentcited by 4
- 2025Pixel-level Certified Explanations via Randomized Smoothingcited by 4
- 2024Are Classification Robustness and Explanation Robustness Really Strongly Correlated? An Analysis Through Input Loss Landscapecited by 0
- 2024Revealing Vulnerabilities of Neural Networks in Parameter Learning and Defense Against Explanation-Aware Backdoorscited by 0
- 2025Pixel-level Certified Explanations via Randomized Smoothing18 Jun 2025
- 2024Revealing Vulnerabilities of Neural Networks in Parameter Learning and Defense Against Explanation-Aware Backdoors25 Mar 2024
- 2024Are Classification Robustness and Explanation Robustness Really Strongly Correlated? An Analysis Through Input Loss Landscape9 Mar 2024
- 2023Adversarial attacks and defenses in explainable artificial intelligence: A survey6 Jun 2023
- 2022Towards More Robust Interpretation via Local Gradient Alignment29 Nov 2022
- 2022SAFARI: Versatile and Efficient Evaluations for Robustness of Interpretability19 Aug 2022