mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Interpretation Quality Score for Measuring the Quality of interpretability methods

arXiv 2205.12254 ↗First posted 24 May 2022cs.CL cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine learning (ML) models have been applied to a wide range of natural language processing (NLP) tasks in recent years. In addition to making accurate decisions, the necessity of understanding how models make their decisions has become apparent in many applications. To that end, many interpretability methods that help explain the decision processes of ML models have been developed. Yet, there currently exists no widely-accepted metric to evaluate the quality of explanations generated by these methods. As a result, there currently is no standard way of measuring to what degree an interpretability method achieves an intended objective. Moreover, there is no accepted standard of performance by which we can compare and rank the current existing interpretability methods. In this paper, we propose a novel metric for quantifying the quality of explanations generated by interpretability methods. We compute the metric on three NLP tasks using six interpretability methods and present our results.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 May 2022.

Builds on

23 of 36 references.

References · 23

  1. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  3. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  4. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  5. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  6. 2019Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AIcited by 1,552
  7. 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
  8. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
  9. 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 990
  10. 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 973
  11. 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 721
  12. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
11 more
  1. 2020Captum: A unified and generic model interpretability library for PyTorchcited by 547
  2. 2016Not Just a Black Box: Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 297
  3. 2018Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretabilitycited by 256
  4. 2020Interpretable Machine Learning -- A Brief History, State-of-the-Art and Challengescited by 120
  5. 2020Drug discovery with explainable artificial intelligencecited by 118
  6. 2020The role of explainability in creating trustworthy artificial intelligence for health care: a comprehensive survey of the terminology, design choices, and evaluation strategiescited by 92
  7. 2020On quantitative aspects of model interpretabilitycited by 71
  8. 2017The Promise and Peril of Human Evaluation for Model Interpretabilitycited by 52
  9. 2019Quantifying Interpretability and Trust in Machine Learning Systemscited by 49
  10. 2019Assessing the Local Interpretability of Machine Learning Modelscited by 23
  11. 2018A Human-Grounded Evaluation Benchmark for Local Explanations of Machine Learningcited by 21

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

3 papers.