# Targeted Activation Penalties Help CNNs Ignore Spurious Signals

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.12813 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12813/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 21 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [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)
- [Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1503.02531/) (2015)
- [Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02391/) (2016)
- [Densely Connected Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.06993/) (2016)
- ["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)
- [Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6034/) (2013)
- [Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10045/) (2019)
- [Paying More Attention to Attention: Improving the Performance of Convolutional Neural Networks via Attention Transfer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.03928/) (2016)
- [Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Net](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6806/) (2014)
- [Confounding variables can degrade generalization performance of radiological deep learning models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.00431/) (2018)
- [Unmasking Clever Hans Predictors and Assessing What Machines Really Learn](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.10178/) (2019)
- [Right for the Right Reasons: Training Differentiable Models by Constraining their Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.03717/) (2017)
- [Women also Snowboard: Overcoming Bias in Captioning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.09797/) (2018)
- [Interpretations are useful: penalizing explanations to align neural networks with prior knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.13584/) (2019)
- [Making deep neural networks right for the right scientific reasons by interacting with their explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.05371/) (2020)
- [Knowledge Transfer with Jacobian Matching](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.00443/) (2018)
- [Auditing Black-box Models for Indirect Influence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.07043/) (2016)
- [Impact of Feedback Type on Explanatory Interactive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.12476/) (2022)
- [Use Perturbations when Learning from Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.06419/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [The Clever Hans Mirage: A Comprehensive Survey on Spurious Correlations in Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.12715/) (2024)
- [Contestable AI needs Computational Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.10729/) (2024)
- [Model Guidance via Robust Feature Attribution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.19680/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Neural networks (NNs) can learn to rely on spurious signals in the training data, leading to poor generalisation. Recent methods tackle this problem by training NNs with additional ground-truth annotations of such signals. These methods may, however, let spurious signals re-emerge in deep convolutional NNs (CNNs). We propose Targeted Activation Penalty (TAP), a new method tackling the same problem by penalising activations to control the re-emergence of spurious signals in deep CNNs, while also lowering training times and memory usage. In addition, ground-truth annotations can be expensive to obtain. We show that TAP still works well with annotations generated by pre-trained models as effective substitutes of ground-truth annotations. We demonstrate the power of TAP against two state-of-the-art baselines on the MNIST benchmark and on two clinical image datasets, using four different CNN architectures.