Fidelity of Interpretability Methods and Perturbation Artifacts in Neural Networks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Despite excellent performance of deep neural networks (DNNs) in image classification, detection, and prediction, characterizing how DNNs make a given decision remains an open problem, resulting in a number of interpretability methods. Post-hoc interpretability methods primarily aim to quantify the importance of input features with respect to the class probabilities. However, due to the lack of ground truth and the existence of interpretability methods with diverse operating characteristics, evaluating these methods is a crucial challenge. A popular approach to evaluate interpretability methods is to perturb input features deemed important for a given prediction and observe the decrease in accuracy. However, perturbation itself may introduce artifacts. We propose a method for estimating the impact of such artifacts on the fidelity estimation by utilizing model accuracy curves from perturbing input features according to the Most Import First (MIF) and Least Import First (LIF) orders. Using the ResNet-50 trained on the ImageNet, we demonstrate the proposed fidelity estimation of four popular post-hoc interpretability methods.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Mar 2022.
Builds on
15 of 20 references.
References · 15
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,278
- 2016Adversarial examples in the physical worldcited by 1,762
- 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
- 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 983
- 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 611
- 2018A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networkscited by 467
- 2018Do Deep Generative Models Know What They Don't Know?cited by 443
- 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
3 more
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
7 papers.
- 2023Finding the right XAI method -- A Guide for the Evaluation and Ranking of Explainable AI Methods in Climate Sciencecited by 25
- 2023Class-Discriminative Attention Maps for Vision Transformerscited by 10
- 2024False Sense of Security in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)cited by 4
- 2025Explain and Monitor Deep Learning Models for Computer Vision using Obz AIcited by 0
- 2026Regularizing Attention Scores with Bootstrappingcited by 0
- 2026AIM: Adversarial Information Masking for Faithfulness Evaluation of Saliency Mapscited by 0
- 2026Explaining Time Series Forecasting with Horizon-Resolved Attributioncited by 0
- 2026Explaining Time Series Forecasting with Horizon-Resolved Attribution11 Sep 2026
- 2026AIM: Adversarial Information Masking for Faithfulness Evaluation of Saliency Maps16 May 2026
- 2026Regularizing Attention Scores with Bootstrapping1 Apr 2026
- 2025Explain and Monitor Deep Learning Models for Computer Vision using Obz AI25 Aug 2025
- 2024False Sense of Security in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)6 May 2024
- 2023Class-Discriminative Attention Maps for Vision Transformers4 Dec 2023
- 2023Finding the right XAI method -- A Guide for the Evaluation and Ranking of Explainable AI Methods in Climate Science1 Mar 2023