# Concept-based Explanations using Non-negative Concept Activation Vectors and Decision Tree for CNN Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.10807 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.10807/

## 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 (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01703/) (2019)
- [Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02391/) (2016)
- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.04150/) (2015)
- [Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6034/) (2013)
- [Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1311.2901/) (2013)
- [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)
- [Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.07269/) (2017)
- [A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.01933/) (2018)
- [Network Dissection: Quantifying Interpretability of Deep Visual Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.05796/) (2017)
- [Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragile](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.10547/) (2017)
- [Metrics for Explainable AI: Challenges and Prospects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.04608/) (2018)
- [Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.07810/) (2018)
- [Explaining Explanations in AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.01439/) (2018)
- [Invertible Concept-based Explanations for CNN Models with Non-negative Concept Activation Vectors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.15417/) (2020)
- [Interpreting CNNs via Decision Trees](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.00121/) (2018)
- [How model accuracy and explanation fidelity influence user trust](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.12652/) (2019)
- [The Why and How of Nonnegative Matrix Factorization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1401.5226/) (2014)
- [Bayesian Hyperparameter Optimization for Ensemble Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1605.06394/) (2016)
- [Knockoffs for the mass: new feature importance statistics with false discovery guarantees](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.06214/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [A survey on Concept-based Approaches For Model Improvement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.14566/) (2024)
- [Transformation of audio embeddings into interpretable, concept-based representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.14076/) (2025)

## 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.