Sanity Checks for Explanation Uncertainty
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Explanations for machine learning models can be hard to interpret or be wrong. Combining an explanation method with an uncertainty estimation method produces explanation uncertainty. Evaluating explanation uncertainty is difficult. In this paper we propose sanity checks for uncertainty explanation methods, where a weight and data randomization tests are defined for explanations with uncertainty, allowing for quick tests to combinations of uncertainty and explanation methods. We experimentally show the validity and effectiveness of these tests on the CIFAR10 and California Housing datasets, noting that Ensembles seem to consistently pass both tests with Guided Backpropagation, Integrated Gradients, and LIME explanations.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Mar 2024.
Builds on
11 of 18 references.
References · 11
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
- 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 983
- 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
- 2018Flipout: Efficient Pseudo-Independent Weight Perturbations on Mini-Batchescited by 133
- 2020Reliable Post hoc Explanations: Modeling Uncertainty in Explainabilitycited by 125
- 2019DropConnect Is Effective in Modeling Uncertainty of Bayesian Deep Networkscited by 92
- 2021Explaining Bayesian Neural Networkscited by 18
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.