# Training Feature Attribution for Vision Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09135 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.09135/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 32 of its 46 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 32)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00020/) (2021)
- [An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.11929/) (2020)
- [Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02391/) (2016)
- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- ["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)
- [Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1311.2901/) (2013)
- [Invariant Risk Minimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.02893/) (2019)
- [Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.04730/) (2017)
- [Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08608/) (2017)
- [Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.11279/) (2017)
- [Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.07269/) (2017)
- [Sanity Checks for Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.03292/) (2018)
- [SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noise](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03825/) (2017)
- [Grad-CAM++: Improved Visual Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.11063/) (2017)
- [This Looks Like That: Deep Learning for Interpretable Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.10574/) (2018)
- [Recognition in Terra Incognita](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.04975/) (2018)
- [Data Shapley: Equitable Valuation of Data for Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.02868/) (2019)
- [Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient Descent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.08484/) (2020)
- [Noise or Signal: The Role of Image Backgrounds in Object Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.09994/) (2020)
- [Studying Large Language Model Generalization with Influence Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03296/) (2023)
- [CRAFT: Concept Recursive Activation FacTorization for Explainability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.10154/) (2022)
- [On Feature Learning in the Presence of Spurious Correlations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.11369/) (2022)
- [Explaining Black Box Predictions and Unveiling Data Artifacts through Influence Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.06676/) (2020)
- [Input Similarity from the Neural Network Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.05262/) (2021)
- [Combining Feature and Instance Attribution to Detect Artifacts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.00323/) (2021)
- [Natural Example-Based Explainability: a Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.03234/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Concept Influence: Leveraging Interpretability to Improve Performance and Efficiency in Training Data Attribution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14869/) (2026)
- [When Entropy Is Not Enough: Reclaiming Lost Semantics in LLM Output Length Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.15592/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Deep neural networks are often considered opaque systems, prompting the need for explainability methods to improve trust and accountability. Existing approaches typically attribute test-time predictions either to input features (e.g., pixels in an image) or to influential training examples. We argue that both perspectives should be studied jointly. This work explores *training feature attribution*, which links test predictions to specific regions of specific training images and thereby provides new insights into the inner workings of deep models. Our experiments on vision datasets show that training feature attribution yields fine-grained, test-specific explanations: it identifies harmful examples that drive misclassifications and reveals spurious correlations, such as patch-based shortcuts, that conventional attribution methods fail to expose.