CHAOSMINING: Benchmarking Post-Hoc Attribution with Sparse Informative Features in High Dimensions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Post-hoc attribution is widely used to identify important model inputs, but evaluating whether these attributions identify truly informative features is difficult because real datasets rarely provide reliable ground truth. We introduce a multimodal benchmark containing symbolic tabular, vision, and audio tasks with known informative feature sets. In the main benchmark conditions, informative variables, spatial regions, or channels occupy fixed input coordinates while the remaining inputs provide irrelevant or distracting information. We use the benchmark to study how attribution quality depends on predictive performance, irrelevant-feature burden and structure, model configuration, and attribution mechanism, while separately measuring identification, stability, and computational cost. In most symbolic-data sweeps, informative-set identification co-varies with predictive performance, while the relative ordering of attribution methods remains largely stable. Across modalities, no method dominates all architectures and conditions, and greater attribution complexity does not consistently improve identification. Simple gradient attribution is often competitive at lower computational cost, while the vision and audio results show that architecture and the form of irrelevant content materially affect attribution quality.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2024.
Builds on
28 of 45 references.
References · 28
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
- 2021Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer using Shifted Windowscited by 12,139
- 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2020wav2vec 2.0: A Framework for Self-Supervised Learning of Speech Representationscited by 3,905
- 2022A ConvNet for the 2020scited by 3,579
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
16 more
- 2020Conformer: Convolution-augmented Transformer for Speech Recognitioncited by 1,863
- 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
- 2021EfficientNetV2: Smaller Models and Faster Trainingcited by 1,135
- 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 990
- 2018Speech Commands: A Dataset for Limited-Vocabulary Speech Recognitioncited by 752
- 2020Captum: A unified and generic model interpretability library for PyTorchcited by 547
- 2022Quantus: An Explainable AI Toolkit for Responsible Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations and Beyondcited by 171
- 2019Explainable Machine Learning for Scientific Insights and Discoveriescited by 166
- 2020Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAIcited by 126
- 2014Long Short-Term Memory Based Recurrent Neural Network Architectures for Large Vocabulary Speech Recognitioncited by 111
- 2021HIVE: Evaluating the Human Interpretability of Visual Explanationscited by 105
- 2016Neural Machine Translation in Linear Timecited by 66
- 2021Synthetic Benchmarks for Scientific Research in Explainable Machine Learningcited by 59
- 2021Scrutinizing XAI using linear ground-truth data with suppressor variablescited by 18
- 2022A Fine-grained Interpretability Evaluation Benchmark for Neural NLPcited by 15
- 2022BAGEL: A Benchmark for Assessing Graph Neural Network Explanationscited by 11
Built on by
Not cited yet.