Explaining, Analyzing, and Probing Representations of Self-Supervised Learning Models for Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In recent years, self-supervised learning (SSL) frameworks have been extensively applied to sensor-based Human Activity Recognition (HAR) in order to learn deep representations without data annotations. While SSL frameworks reach performance almost comparable to supervised models, studies on interpreting representations learnt by SSL models are limited. Nevertheless, modern explainability methods could help to unravel the differences between SSL and supervised representations: how they are being learnt, what properties of input data they preserve, and when SSL can be chosen over supervised training. In this paper, we aim to analyze deep representations of two recent SSL frameworks, namely SimCLR and VICReg. Specifically, the emphasis is made on (i) comparing the robustness of supervised and SSL models to corruptions in input data; (ii) explaining predictions of deep learning models using saliency maps and highlighting what input channels are mostly used for predicting various activities; (iii) exploring properties encoded in SSL and supervised representations using probing. Extensive experiments on two single-device datasets (MobiAct and UCI-HAR) have shown that self-supervised learning representations are significantly more robust to noise in unseen data compared to supervised models. In contrast, features learnt by the supervised approaches are more homogeneous across subjects and better encode the nature of activities.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Apr 2023.
Builds on
23 of 42 references.
References · 23
- 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2020Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised Learningcited by 4,712
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2020Exploring Simple Siamese Representation Learningcited by 2,853
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,278
- 2021Barlow Twins: Self-Supervised Learning via Redundancy Reductioncited by 1,818
- 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,454
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
- 2014Two-Stream Convolutional Networks for Action Recognition in Videoscited by 1,067
11 more
- 2021VICReg: Variance-Invariance-Covariance Regularization for Self-Supervised Learningcited by 1,013
- 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 983
- 2017Large Batch Training of Convolutional Networkscited by 529
- 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 452
- 2022On the duality between contrastive and non-contrastive self-supervised learningcited by 107
- 2019Multi-task Self-Supervised Learning for Human Activity Detectioncited by 98
- 2020Contrastive Predictive Coding for Human Activity Recognitioncited by 54
- 2017Deep Residual Bidir-LSTM for Human Activity Recognition Using Wearable Sensorscited by 24
- 2021Revisiting Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 20
- 2022Contrastive Learning with Cross-Modal Knowledge Mining for Multimodal Human Activity Recognitioncited by 9
- 2022Simple Yet Surprisingly Effective Training Strategies for LSTMs in Sensor-Based Human Activity Recognitioncited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.