mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Do Users Benefit From Interpretable Vision? A User Study, Baseline, And Dataset

arXiv 2204.11642 ↗First posted 25 Apr 2022cs.LG cs.AI cs.CVcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A variety of methods exist to explain image classification models. However, whether they provide any benefit to users over simply comparing various inputs and the model's respective predictions remains unclear. We conducted a user study (N=240) to test how such a baseline explanation technique performs against concept-based and counterfactual explanations. To this end, we contribute a synthetic dataset generator capable of biasing individual attributes and quantifying their relevance to the model. In a study, we assess if participants can identify the relevant set of attributes compared to the ground-truth. Our results show that the baseline outperformed concept-based explanations. Counterfactual explanations from an invertible neural network performed similarly as the baseline. Still, they allowed users to identify some attributes more accurately. Our results highlight the importance of measuring how well users can reason about biases of a model, rather than solely relying on technical evaluations or proxy tasks. We open-source our study and dataset so it can serve as a blue-print for future studies. For code see, https://github.com/berleon/do_users_benefit_from_interpretable_vision

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Apr 2022.

Builds on

35 of 52 references.

References · 35

  1. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  2. 2018MobileNetV2: Inverted Residuals and Linear Bottleneckscited by 4,773
  3. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  4. 2016Density estimation using Real NVPcited by 2,029
  5. 2018Glow: Generative Flow with Invertible 1x1 Convolutionscited by 1,539
  6. 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,445
  7. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  8. 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,309
  9. 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
  10. 2014NICE: Non-linear Independent Components Estimationcited by 1,052
  11. 2018This Looks Like That: Deep Learning for Interpretable Image Recognitioncited by 731
  12. 2018Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 508
23 more
  1. 2019Approximating CNNs with Bag-of-local-Features models works surprisingly well on ImageNetcited by 260
  2. 2020Debugging Tests for Model Explanationscited by 146
  3. 2018Explaining Image Classifiers by Counterfactual Generationcited by 144
  4. 2018i-RevNet: Deep Invertible Networkscited by 137
  5. 2019Explaining Classifiers with Causal Concept Effect (CaCE)cited by 135
  6. 2020Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAIcited by 125
  7. 2017Augmented Reality Meets Computer Vision : Efficient Data Generation for Urban Driving Scenescited by 122
  8. 2020Interpretable Machine Learning -- A Brief History, State-of-the-Art and Challengescited by 120
  9. 2020Invertible Concept-based Explanations for CNN Models with Non-negative Concept Activation Vectorscited by 119
  10. 2021Counterfactual Generative Networkscited by 111
  11. 2019Benchmarking Attribution Methods with Relative Feature Importancecited by 89
  12. 2020Evaluating Saliency Map Explanations for Convolutional Neural Networks: A User Studycited by 86
  13. 2019Explanation by Progressive Exaggerationcited by 76
  14. 2020GANterfactual - Counterfactual Explanations for Medical Non-Experts using Generative Adversarial Learningcited by 50
  15. 2017Visual Feature Attribution using Wasserstein GANscited by 47
  16. 2020How Useful Are the Machine-Generated Interpretations to General Users? A Human Evaluation on Guessing the Incorrectly Predicted Labelscited by 39
  17. 2019Generative Counterfactual Introspection for Explainable Deep Learningcited by 36
  18. 2020Are Visual Explanations Useful? A Case Study in Model-in-the-Loop Predictioncited by 36
  19. 2021ECINN: Efficient Counterfactuals from Invertible Neural Networkscited by 26
  20. 2021Image Cropping on Twitter: Fairness Metrics, their Limitations, and the Importance of Representation, Design, and Agencycited by 22
  21. 2018Dice in the Black Box: User Experiences with an Inscrutable Algorithmcited by 7
  22. 2020Exemplary Natural Images Explain CNN Activations Better than State-of-the-Art Feature Visualizationcited by 5
  23. 2020Generative Classifiers as a Basis for Trustworthy Image Classificationcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 3; 2023: 2; 2024: 3; 2025: 1; 2026: 4.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area: