ExCon: Explanation-driven Supervised Contrastive Learning for Image Classification
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Contrastive learning has led to substantial improvements in the quality of learned embedding representations for tasks such as image classification. However, a key drawback of existing contrastive augmentation methods is that they may lead to the modification of the image content which can yield undesired alterations of its semantics. This can affect the performance of the model on downstream tasks. Hence, in this paper, we ask whether we can augment image data in contrastive learning such that the task-relevant semantic content of an image is preserved. For this purpose, we propose to leverage saliency-based explanation methods to create content-preserving masked augmentations for contrastive learning. Our novel explanation-driven supervised contrastive learning (ExCon) methodology critically serves the dual goals of encouraging nearby image embeddings to have similar content and explanation. To quantify the impact of ExCon, we conduct experiments on the CIFAR-100 and the Tiny ImageNet datasets. We demonstrate that ExCon outperforms vanilla supervised contrastive learning in terms of classification, explanation quality, adversarial robustness as well as probabilistic calibration in the context of distributional shift.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Nov 2021.
Builds on
31 of 43 references.
References · 31
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
- 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,662
- 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,482
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2016SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restartscited by 4,993
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
19 more
- 2015FaceNet: A Unified Embedding for Face Recognition and Clusteringcited by 2,833
- 2020Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 2,803
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
- 2020Big Self-Supervised Models are Strong Semi-Supervised Learnerscited by 1,375
- 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,309
- 2019Contrastive Multiview Codingcited by 1,297
- 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,274
- 2018Learning deep representations by mutual information estimation and maximizationcited by 1,265
- 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
- 2017Grad-CAM++: Improved Visual Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networkscited by 936
- 2018AutoAugment: Learning Augmentation Policies from Datacited by 728
- 2019Data-Efficient Image Recognition with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 672
- 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 590
- 2019A Theoretical Analysis of Contrastive Unsupervised Representation Learningcited by 530
- 2021Revisiting the Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 387
- 2017A Downsampled Variant of ImageNet as an Alternative to the CIFAR datasetscited by 374
- 2020Puzzle Mix: Exploiting Saliency and Local Statistics for Optimal Mixupcited by 260
- 2020CASTing Your Model: Learning to Localize Improves Self-Supervised Representationscited by 63
- 2021Robust Representation Learning via Perceptual Similarity Metricscited by 23
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
2 papers.