# Explainer Divergence Scores (EDS): Some Post-Hoc Explanations May be Effective for Detecting Unknown Spurious Correlations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.07650 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.07650/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 33 of its 45 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Nov 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 33)

- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.01365/) (2017)
- [Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.07780/) (2020)
- [A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.09635/) (2019)
- [Invariant Risk Minimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.02893/) (2019)
- [Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.04730/) (2017)
- [Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08608/) (2017)
- [Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.11279/) (2017)
- [Targeted Backdoor Attacks on Deep Learning Systems Using Data Poisoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.05526/) (2017)
- [Challenging Common Assumptions in the Unsupervised Learning of Disentangled Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.12359/) (2018)
- [Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.07524/) (2016)
- [Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient Descent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.08484/) (2020)
- [Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragile](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.10547/) (2017)
- [Unmasking Clever Hans Predictors and Assessing What Machines Really Learn](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.10178/) (2019)
- [Noise or Signal: The Role of Image Backgrounds in Object Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.09994/) (2020)
- [The (Un)reliability of saliency methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00867/) (2017)
- [On the Robustness of Interpretability Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.08049/) (2018)
- [An Investigation of Why Overparameterization Exacerbates Spurious Correlations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.04345/) (2020)
- [Influence Functions in Deep Learning Are Fragile](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.14651/) (2020)
- [Stolen Memories: Leveraging Model Memorization for Calibrated White-Box Membership Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.11798/) (2019)
- [Debugging Tests for Model Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.05429/) (2020)
- [Explaining Black Box Predictions and Unveiling Data Artifacts through Influence Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.06676/) (2020)
- [OpenXAI: Towards a Transparent Evaluation of Model Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.11104/) (2022)
- [Do Feature Attribution Methods Correctly Attribute Features?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.14403/) (2021)
- [Automated Experiments on Ad Privacy Settings: A Tale of Opacity, Choice, and Discrimination](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1408.6491/) (2014)
- [Examining and Combating Spurious Features under Distribution Shift](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.07171/) (2021)
- [Synthetic Benchmarks for Scientific Research in Explainable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.12543/) (2021)
- [Now You See Me (CME): Concept-based Model Extraction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.13233/) (2020)
- [Fairness via Explanation Quality: Evaluating Disparities in the Quality of Post hoc Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.07277/) (2022)
- [GCExplainer: Human-in-the-Loop Concept-based Explanations for Graph Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.11889/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent work has suggested post-hoc explainers might be ineffective for detecting spurious correlations in Deep Neural Networks (DNNs). However, we show there are serious weaknesses with the existing evaluation frameworks for this setting. Previously proposed metrics are extremely difficult to interpret and are not directly comparable between explainer methods. To alleviate these constraints, we propose a new evaluation methodology, Explainer Divergence Scores (EDS), grounded in an information theory approach to evaluate explainers. EDS is easy to interpret and naturally comparable across explainers. We use our methodology to compare the detection performance of three different explainers - feature attribution methods, influential examples and concept extraction, on two different image datasets. We discover post-hoc explainers often contain substantial information about a DNN's dependence on spurious artifacts, but in ways often imperceptible to human users. This suggests the need for new techniques that can use this information to better detect a DNN's reliance on spurious correlations.