# Interpretable Diversity Analysis: Visualizing Feature Representations In Low-Cost Ensembles

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.05822 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.05822/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 10 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.02685/) (2017)
- [SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noise](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03825/) (2017)
- [Loss Surfaces, Mode Connectivity, and Fast Ensembling of DNNs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.10026/) (2018)
- [Deep Ensembles: A Loss Landscape Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.02757/) (2019)
- [BatchEnsemble: An Alternative Approach to Efficient Ensemble and Lifelong Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.06715/) (2020)
- [Snapshot Ensembles: Train 1, get M for free](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.00109/) (2017)
- [A Survey on Neural Network Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.14261/) (2020)
- [Training independent subnetworks for robust prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.06610/) (2020)
- [Why M Heads are Better than One: Training a Diverse Ensemble of Deep Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1511.06314/) (2015)
- [Prune and Tune Ensembles: Low-Cost Ensemble Learning With Sparse Independent Subnetworks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.11782/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Diversity is an important consideration in the construction of robust neural network ensembles. A collection of well trained models will generalize better if they are diverse in the patterns they respond to and the predictions they make. Diversity is especially important for low-cost ensemble methods because members often share network structure in order to avoid training several independent models from scratch. Diversity is traditionally analyzed by measuring differences between the outputs of models. However, this gives little insight into how knowledge representations differ between ensemble members. This paper introduces several interpretability methods that can be used to qualitatively analyze diversity. We demonstrate these techniques by comparing the diversity of feature representations between child networks using two low-cost ensemble algorithms, Snapshot Ensembles and Prune and Tune Ensembles. We use the same pre-trained parent network as a starting point for both methods which allows us to explore how feature representations evolve over time. This approach to diversity analysis can lead to valuable insights and new perspectives for how we measure and promote diversity in ensemble methods.