# On the Effectiveness of Methods and Metrics for Explainable AI in Remote Sensing Image Scene Classification

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.05916 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.05916/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 47 of its 78 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Jul 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 47)

- [Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6572/) (2014)
- [Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02391/) (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)
- [Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1311.2901/) (2013)
- [Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.02685/) (2017)
- [Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08608/) (2017)
- [Sanity Checks for Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.03292/) (2018)
- [Deep Neural Networks are Easily Fooled: High Confidence Predictions for Unrecognizable Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.1897/) (2014)
- [Captum: A unified and generic model interpretability library for PyTorch](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.07896/) (2020)
- [Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.00069/) (2018)
- [Towards Robust Interpretability with Self-Explaining Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.07538/) (2018)
- [A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.10758/) (2018)
- [Interpretation of Neural Networks is Fragile](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.10547/) (2017)
- [Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02508/) (2019)
- [European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation"](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.08813/) (2016)
- [Top-down Neural Attention by Excitation Backprop](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.00507/) (2016)
- [On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.09392/) (2019)
- [From Anecdotal Evidence to Quantitative Evaluation Methods: A Systematic Review on Evaluating Explainable AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.08164/) (2022)
- [DeepGlobe 2018: A Challenge to Parse the Earth through Satellite Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.06561/) (2018)
- [BigEarthNet: A Large-Scale Benchmark Archive For Remote Sensing Image Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.06148/) (2019)
- [Evaluating and Aggregating Feature-based Model Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.00631/) (2020)
- [Quantus: An Explainable AI Toolkit for Responsible Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.06861/) (2022)
- [Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.07258/) (2020)
- [Explainable AI (XAI): A Systematic Meta-Survey of Current Challenges and Future Opportunities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.06420/) (2021)
- [When Explanations Lie: Why Many Modified BP Attributions Fail](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.09818/) (2019)
- [BigEarthNet-MM: A Large Scale Multi-Modal Multi-Label Benchmark Archive for Remote Sensing Image Classification and Retrieval](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.07921/) (2021)
- [A Comprehensive Taxonomy for Explainable Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Survey of Surveys on Methods and Concepts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.07190/) (2021)
- [Mission Critical -- Satellite Data is a Distinct Modality in Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01444/) (2024)
- [Towards Best Practice in Explaining Neural Network Decisions with LRP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.09840/) (2019)

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

- [Evaluating the Interpretability of Sparse Autoencoders with Concept Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.24716/) (2026)
- [FedX: Explanation-Guided Pruning for Communication-Efficient Federated Learning in Remote Sensing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.06256/) (2025)
- [Survey on Remote Sensing Scene Classification: From Traditional Methods to Large Generative AI Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.26751/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The development of explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) methods for scene classification problems has attracted great attention in remote sensing (RS). Most xAI methods and the related evaluation metrics in RS are initially developed for natural images considered in computer vision (CV), and their direct usage in RS may not be suitable. To address this issue, in this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of explanation methods and metrics in the context of RS image scene classification. In detail, we methodologically and experimentally analyze ten explanation metrics spanning five categories (faithfulness, robustness, localization, complexity, randomization), applied to five established feature attribution methods (Occlusion, LIME, GradCAM, LRP, and DeepLIFT) across three RS datasets. Our methodological analysis identifies key limitations in both explanation methods and metrics. The performance of perturbation-based methods, such as Occlusion and LIME, heavily depends on perturbation baselines and spatial characteristics of RS scenes. Gradient-based approaches like GradCAM struggle when multiple labels are present in the same image, while some relevance propagation methods (LRP) can distribute relevance disproportionately relative to the spatial extent of classes. Analogously, we find limitations in evaluation metrics. Faithfulness metrics share the same problems as perturbation-based methods. Localization metrics and complexity metrics are unreliable for classes with a large spatial extent. In contrast, robustness metrics and randomization metrics consistently exhibit greater stability. Our experimental results support these methodological findings. Based on our analysis, we provide guidelines for selecting explanation methods, metrics, and hyperparameters in the context of RS image scene classification.