mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Evaluating self-attention interpretability through human-grounded experimental protocol

arXiv 2303.15190 ↗First posted 27 Mar 2023cs.LG cs.CLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Attention mechanisms have played a crucial role in the development of complex architectures such as Transformers in natural language processing. However, Transformers remain hard to interpret and are considered as black-boxes. This paper aims to assess how attention coefficients from Transformers can help in providing interpretability. A new attention-based interpretability method called CLaSsification-Attention (CLS-A) is proposed. CLS-A computes an interpretability score for each word based on the attention coefficient distribution related to the part specific to the classification task within the Transformer architecture. A human-grounded experiment is conducted to evaluate and compare CLS-A to other interpretability methods. The experimental protocol relies on the capacity of an interpretability method to provide explanation in line with human reasoning. Experiment design includes measuring reaction times and correct response rates by human subjects. CLS-A performs comparably to usual interpretability methods regarding average participant reaction time and accuracy. The lower computational cost of CLS-A compared to other interpretability methods and its availability by design within the classifier make it particularly interesting. Data analysis also highlights the link between the probability score of a classifier prediction and adequate explanations. Finally, our work confirms the relevancy of the use of CLS-A and shows to which extent self-attention contains rich information to explain Transformer classifiers.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2023.

Builds on

25 of 32 references.

References · 25

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  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. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  6. 2014Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translatecited by 4,548
  7. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,307
  8. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  9. 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
  10. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
  11. 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,156
  12. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
13 more
  1. 2020Quantifying Attention Flow in Transformerscited by 775
  2. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 636
  3. 2020Transformer Interpretability Beyond Attention Visualizationcited by 627
  4. 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 389
  5. 2015Understanding Neural Networks Through Deep Visualizationcited by 334
  6. 2019A Multiscale Visualization of Attention in the Transformer Modelcited by 292
  7. 2018Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretabilitycited by 256
  8. 2019InterpretML: A Unified Framework for Machine Learning Interpretabilitycited by 246
  9. 2019Explainable Machine Learning in Deploymentcited by 211
  10. 2020The elephant in the interpretability room: Why use attention as explanation when we have saliency methods?cited by 122
  11. 2022Formal Algorithms for Transformerscited by 72
  12. 2019Attention Interpretability Across NLP Taskscited by 71
  13. 2019Quantifying Interpretability and Trust in Machine Learning Systemscited by 49

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 3.

5 papers.