# On The Coherence of Quantitative Evaluation of Visual Explanations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.10764 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.10764/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 40 of its 56 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Feb 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 40)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1409.1556/) (2014)
- [ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1409.0575/) (2014)
- [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)
- [Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.01365/) (2017)
- [VQA: Visual Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1505.00468/) (2015)
- [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)
- [Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.02685/) (2017)
- [Sanity Checks for Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.03292/) (2018)
- [SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noise](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03825/) (2017)
- [Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Net](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6806/) (2014)
- [Grad-CAM++: Improved Visual Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.11063/) (2017)
- [RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.07421/) (2018)
- [Score-CAM: Score-Weighted Visual Explanations for Convolutional Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.01279/) (2019)
- [Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learned](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1509.06321/) (2015)
- [Unmasking Clever Hans Predictors and Assessing What Machines Really Learn](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.10178/) (2019)
- [The (Un)reliability of saliency methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00867/) (2017)
- [Top-down Neural Attention by Excitation Backprop](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.00507/) (2016)
- [Image Captioning with Semantic Attention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1603.03925/) (2016)
- [Efficient Object Localization Using Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1411.4280/) (2014)
- [Axiom-based Grad-CAM: Towards Accurate Visualization and Explanation of CNNs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.02312/) (2020)
- [Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.07258/) (2020)
- [Visual Question Answering: A Survey of Methods and Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.05910/) (2016)
- [A Review on Deep Learning Techniques Applied to Semantic Segmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.06857/) (2017)
- [Sanity Checks for Saliency Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01451/) (2019)
- [Smooth Grad-CAM++: An Enhanced Inference Level Visualization Technique for Deep Convolutional Neural Network Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.01224/) (2019)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Towards the Characterization of Representations Learned via Capsule-based Network Architectures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.05349/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent years have shown an increased development of methods for justifying the predictions of neural networks through visual explanations. These explanations usually take the form of heatmaps which assign a saliency (or relevance) value to each pixel of the input image that expresses how relevant the pixel is for the prediction of a label. Complementing this development, evaluation methods have been proposed to assess the "goodness" of such explanations. On the one hand, some of these methods rely on synthetic datasets. However, this introduces the weakness of having limited guarantees regarding their applicability on more realistic settings. On the other hand, some methods rely on metrics for objective evaluation. However the level to which some of these evaluation methods perform with respect to each other is uncertain. Taking this into account, we conduct a comprehensive study on a subset of the ImageNet-1k validation set where we evaluate a number of different commonly-used explanation methods following a set of evaluation methods. We complement our study with sanity checks on the studied evaluation methods as a means to investigate their reliability and the impact of characteristics of the explanations on the evaluation methods. Results of our study suggest that there is a lack of coherency on the grading provided by some of the considered evaluation methods. Moreover, we have identified some characteristics of the explanations, e.g. sparsity, which can have a significant effect on the performance.