Evaluating the overall sensitivity of saliency-based explanation methods
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We address the need to generate faithful explanations of "black box" Deep Learning models. Several tests have been proposed to determine aspects of faithfulness of explanation methods, but they lack cross-domain applicability and a rigorous methodology. Hence, we select an existing test that is model agnostic and is well-suited for comparing one aspect of faithfulness (i.e., sensitivity) of multiple explanation methods, and extend it by specifying formal thresh-olds and building criteria to determine the over-all sensitivity of the explanation method. We present examples of how multiple explanation methods for Convolutional Neural Networks can be compared using this extended methodology. Finally, we discuss the relationship between sensitivity and faithfulness and consider how the test can be adapted to assess different explanation methods in other domains.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jun 2023.
Builds on
36 of 61 references.
References · 36
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2015Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Visioncited by 5,451
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2018MobileNetV2: Inverted Residuals and Linear Bottleneckscited by 4,773
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,278
- 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,454
24 more
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
- 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
- 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 983
- 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 970
- 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
- 2018RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Modelscited by 825
- 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
- 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 590
- 2020Captum: A unified and generic model interpretability library for PyTorchcited by 542
- 2017Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragilecited by 443
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
- 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 387
- 2018On the Robustness of Interpretability Methodscited by 310
- 2019On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanationscited by 309
- 2016Not Just a Black Box: Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 295
- 2020Opportunities and Challenges in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): A Surveycited by 252
- 2019Are All Layers Created Equal?cited by 94
- 2019When Explanations Lie: Why Many Modified BP Attributions Failcited by 92
- 2017Towards better understanding of gradient-based attribution methods for Deep Neural Networkscited by 51
- 2021Attention, please! A survey of Neural Attention Models in Deep Learningcited by 50
- 2021Explaining a Series of Models by Propagating Shapley Valuescited by 37
- 2019Global Explanations of Neural Networks: Mapping the Landscape of Predictionscited by 32
- 2019Global Aggregations of Local Explanations for Black Box modelscited by 30
- 2019A study of data and label shift in the LIME frameworkcited by 17
Built on by
Not cited yet.