mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Seeing Isn't Always Believing: Analysis of Grad-CAM Faithfulness and Localization Reliability in Lung Cancer CT Classification

arXiv 2601.12826 ↗First posted 19 Jan 2026cs.CVcited by 2

On the map: LLM reasoning → Clinical and biomedical applications

Abstract (arXiv)

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques, such as Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM), have become indispensable for visualizing the reasoning process of deep neural networks in medical image analysis. Despite their popularity, the faithfulness and reliability of these heatmap-based explanations remain under scrutiny. This study critically investigates whether Grad-CAM truly represents the internal decision-making of deep models trained for lung cancer image classification. Using the publicly available IQ-OTH/NCCD dataset, we evaluate five representative architectures: ResNet-50, ResNet-101, DenseNet-161, EfficientNet-B0, and ViT-Base-Patch16-224, to explore model-dependent variations in Grad-CAM interpretability. We introduce a quantitative evaluation framework that combines localization accuracy, perturbation-based faithfulness, and explanation consistency to assess Grad-CAM reliability across architectures. Experimental findings reveal that while Grad-CAM effectively highlights salient tumor regions in most convolutional networks, its interpretive fidelity significantly degrades for Vision Transformer models due to non-local attention behavior. Furthermore, cross-model comparisons indicate substantial variability in saliency localization, implying that Grad-CAM explanations may not always correspond to the true diagnostic evidence used by the networks. This work exposes critical limitations of current saliency-based XAI approaches in medical imaging and emphasizes the need for model-aware interpretability methods that are both computationally sound and clinically meaningful. Our findings aim to inspire a more cautious and rigorous adoption of visual explanation tools in medical AI, urging the community to rethink what it truly means to "trust" a model's explanation.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Clinical and biomedical applications, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 6 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jan 2026.

Builds on

6 of 15 references.

References · 6

  1. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
  2. 2021Can contrastive learning avoid shortcut solutions?cited by 114
  3. 2021Rectifying the Shortcut Learning of Background for Few-Shot Learningcited by 51
  4. 2024Shortcut Learning in Medical Image Segmentationcited by 16
  5. 2024Explainable AI improves task performance in human-AI collaborationcited by 12
  6. 2025Generalizable and Explainable Deep Learning for Medical Image Computing: An Overviewcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Quantifying Explanation Consistency: The C-Score Metric for CAM-Based Explainability in Medical Image Classification
  2. 2023Is visual explanation with Grad-CAM more reliable for deeper neural networks? a case study with automatic pneumothorax diagnosis
  3. 2025DCSNet: A Lightweight Knowledge Distillation-Based Model with Explainable AI for Lung Cancer Diagnosis from Histopathological Images
  4. 2025Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Biomedical Image Analysis: A Comprehensive Survey
  5. 2025Human-aligned Deep Learning: Explainability, Causality, and Biological Inspiration
  6. 2023High-Fidelity Image Synthesis from Pulmonary Nodule Lesion Maps using Semantic Diffusion Model
  7. 2026EXACT: an explainable anomaly-aware vision foundation model for analysis of 3D chest CT
  8. 2026KANEx: Translating Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks' Interpretability to Medical Explainability