mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Towards Improved Input Masking for Convolutional Neural Networks

arXiv 2211.14646 ↗First posted 26 Nov 2022cs.CV cs.AIcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The ability to remove features from the input of machine learning models is very important to understand and interpret model predictions. However, this is non-trivial for vision models since masking out parts of the input image typically causes large distribution shifts. This is because the baseline color used for masking (typically grey or black) is out of distribution. Furthermore, the shape of the mask itself can contain unwanted signals which can be used by the model for its predictions. Recently, there has been some progress in mitigating this issue (called missingness bias) in image masking for vision transformers. In this work, we propose a new masking method for CNNs we call layer masking in which the missingness bias caused by masking is reduced to a large extent. Intuitively, layer masking applies a mask to intermediate activation maps so that the model only processes the unmasked input. We show that our method (i) is able to eliminate or minimize the influence of the mask shape or color on the output of the model, and (ii) is much better than replacing the masked region by black or grey for input perturbation based interpretability techniques like LIME. Thus, layer masking is much less affected by missingness bias than other masking strategies. We also demonstrate how the shape of the mask may leak information about the class, thus affecting estimates of model reliance on class-relevant features derived from input masking. Furthermore, we discuss the role of data augmentation techniques for tackling this problem, and argue that they are not sufficient for preventing model reliance on mask shape. The code for this project is publicly available at https://github.com/SriramB-98/layer_masking

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Nov 2022.

Builds on

33 of 44 references.

References · 33

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
  3. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  4. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  5. 2017Squeeze-and-Excitation Networkscited by 4,789
  6. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  7. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
  8. 2019RandAugment: Practical automated data augmentation with a reduced search spacecited by 2,269
  9. 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
  10. 2017Random Erasing Data Augmentationcited by 1,239
  11. 2018AutoAugment: Learning Augmentation Policies from Datacited by 730
  12. 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 612
21 more
  1. 2018Image Inpainting for Irregular Holes Using Partial Convolutionscited by 505
  2. 2018A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networkscited by 476
  3. 2021Intriguing Properties of Vision Transformerscited by 446
  4. 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 419
  5. 2017Residual Attention Network for Image Classificationcited by 386
  6. 2021ResNet strikes back: An improved training procedure in timmcited by 368
  7. 2020Noise or Signal: The Role of Image Backgrounds in Object Recognitioncited by 343
  8. 2018Explaining Image Classifiers by Counterfactual Generationcited by 144
  9. 2021Salient ImageNet: How to discover spurious features in Deep Learning?cited by 114
  10. 2021On the Adversarial Robustness of Vision Transformerscited by 106
  11. 2020(De)Randomized Smoothing for Certifiable Defense against Patch Attackscited by 98
  12. 2021Segment and Complete: Defending Object Detectors against Adversarial Patch Attacks with Robust Patch Detectioncited by 67
  13. 2022MaskTune: Mitigating Spurious Correlations by Forcing to Explorecited by 66
  14. 2022A Comprehensive Study of Image Classification Model Sensitivity to Foregrounds, Backgrounds, and Visual Attributescited by 56
  15. 2015Action Recognition using Visual Attentioncited by 49
  16. 2021Certified Patch Robustness via Smoothed Vision Transformerscited by 45
  17. 2021Are Vision Transformers Robust to Patch Perturbations?cited by 39
  18. 2022Missingness Bias in Model Debuggingcited by 38
  19. 2020An Analysis of LIME for Text Datacited by 25
  20. 2022Certified Defences Against Adversarial Patch Attacks on Semantic Segmentationcited by 16
  21. 2018A Note about: Local Explanation Methods for Deep Neural Networks lack Sensitivity to Parameter Valuescited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 3.

8 papers.