mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

"Is your explanation stable?": A Robustness Evaluation Framework for Feature Attribution

arXiv 2209.01782 ↗First posted 5 Sep 2022cs.AI cs.CVcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Understanding the decision process of neural networks is hard. One vital method for explanation is to attribute its decision to pivotal features. Although many algorithms are proposed, most of them solely improve the faithfulness to the model. However, the real environment contains many random noises, which may leads to great fluctuations in the explanations. More seriously, recent works show that explanation algorithms are vulnerable to adversarial attacks. All of these make the explanation hard to trust in real scenarios. To bridge this gap, we propose a model-agnostic method Median Test for Feature Attribution (MeTFA) to quantify the uncertainty and increase the stability of explanation algorithms with theoretical guarantees. MeTFA has the following two functions: (1) examine whether one feature is significantly important or unimportant and generate a MeTFA-significant map to visualize the results; (2) compute the confidence interval of a feature attribution score and generate a MeTFA-smoothed map to increase the stability of the explanation. Experiments show that MeTFA improves the visual quality of explanations and significantly reduces the instability while maintaining the faithfulness. To quantitatively evaluate the faithfulness of an explanation under different noise settings, we further propose several robust faithfulness metrics. Experiment results show that the MeTFA-smoothed explanation can significantly increase the robust faithfulness. In addition, we use two scenarios to show MeTFA's potential in the applications. First, when applied to the SOTA explanation method to locate context bias for semantic segmentation models, MeTFA-significant explanations use far smaller regions to maintain 99%+ faithfulness. Second, when tested with different explanation-oriented attacks, MeTFA can help defend vanilla, as well as adaptive, adversarial attacks against explanations.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Sep 2022.

Builds on

32 of 51 references.

References · 32

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
  3. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,441
  4. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
  5. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  6. 2016The Cityscapes Dataset for Semantic Urban Scene Understandingcited by 4,427
  7. 2014Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networkscited by 2,974
  8. 2015Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localizationcited by 2,430
  9. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
  10. 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
  11. 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
  12. 2018RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Modelscited by 825
20 more
  1. 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 611
  2. 2019Score-CAM: Score-Weighted Visual Explanations for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 575
  3. 2017Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragilecited by 443
  4. 2017The (Un)reliability of saliency methodscited by 331
  5. 2019On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanationscited by 309
  6. 2019Explanations can be manipulated and geometry is to blamecited by 215
  7. 2020Interpreting Super-Resolution Networks with Local Attribution Mapscited by 136
  8. 2021BBAM: Bounding Box Attribution Map for Weakly Supervised Semantic and Instance Segmentationcited by 104
  9. 2016Robustness of classifiers: from adversarial to random noisecited by 87
  10. 2018Interpretable Deep Learning under Firecited by 74
  11. 2020Black-box Explanation of Object Detectors via Saliency Mapscited by 74
  12. 2019Visualizing Deep Networks by Optimizing with Integrated Gradientscited by 59
  13. 2019Interpretable and Fine-Grained Visual Explanations for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 49
  14. 2021Towards the Unification and Robustness of Perturbation and Gradient Based Explanationscited by 47
  15. 2021NeuronFair: Interpretable White-Box Fairness Testing through Biased Neuron Identificationcited by 42
  16. 2021Group-CAM: Group Score-Weighted Visual Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networkscited by 36
  17. 2019Grid Saliency for Context Explanations of Semantic Segmentationcited by 32
  18. 2022Seeing is Living? Rethinking the Security of Facial Liveness Verification in the Deepfake Eracited by 26
  19. 2022Transfer Attacks Revisited: A Large-Scale Empirical Study in Real Computer Vision Settingscited by 11
  20. 2021On the Security Risks of AutoMLcited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year

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

7 papers.