Concept-based Explanations using Non-negative Concept Activation Vectors and Decision Tree for CNN Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper evaluates whether training a decision tree based on concepts extracted from a concept-based explainer can increase interpretability for Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) models and boost the fidelity and performance of the used explainer. CNNs for computer vision have shown exceptional performance in critical industries. However, it is a significant barrier when deploying CNNs due to their complexity and lack of interpretability. Recent studies to explain computer vision models have shifted from extracting low-level features (pixel-based explanations) to mid-or high-level features (concept-based explanations). The current research direction tends to use extracted features in developing approximation algorithms such as linear or decision tree models to interpret an original model. In this work, we modify one of the state-of-the-art concept-based explanations and propose an alternative framework named TreeICE. We design a systematic evaluation based on the requirements of fidelity (approximate models to original model's labels), performance (approximate models to ground-truth labels), and interpretability (meaningful of approximate models to humans). We conduct computational evaluation (for fidelity and performance) and human subject experiments (for interpretability) We find that Tree-ICE outperforms the baseline in interpretability and generates more human readable explanations in the form of a semantic tree structure. This work features how important to have more understandable explanations when interpretability is crucial.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Nov 2022.
Builds on
23 of 58 references.
References · 23
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2015Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localizationcited by 2,436
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
- 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
- 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,319
- 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,206
- 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 973
11 more
- 2017Network Dissection: Quantifying Interpretability of Deep Visual Representationscited by 708
- 2017Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragilecited by 444
- 2018Metrics for Explainable AI: Challenges and Prospectscited by 260
- 2018Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretabilitycited by 256
- 2018Explaining Explanations in AIcited by 137
- 2020Invertible Concept-based Explanations for CNN Models with Non-negative Concept Activation Vectorscited by 120
- 2018Interpreting CNNs via Decision Treescited by 89
- 2019How model accuracy and explanation fidelity influence user trustcited by 45
- 2014The Why and How of Nonnegative Matrix Factorizationcited by 34
- 2016Bayesian Hyperparameter Optimization for Ensemble Learningcited by 11
- 2018Knockoffs for the mass: new feature importance statistics with false discovery guaranteescited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1.
2 papers.