mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Post-Hoc Uncertainty-Aware Explanations for Deployed Power Quality Disturbance Classifiers via Laplace Approximation

arXiv 2604.13658 ↗First posted 15 Apr 2026cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep learning classifiers achieve high accuracy in power quality disturbance (PQD) recognition, but existing explanation methods return a single deterministic attribution map and provide no measure of its reliability. This paper develops a post-hoc Bayesian explanation (B-explanation) method for trained PQD classifiers. A computationally efficient Laplace approximation converts the trained network into an approximate parameter posterior without retraining, and occlusion sensitivity is propagated through posterior samples to produce a distribution over disturbance-localization maps. Percentile summaries of this distribution yield explanations with distribution-free coverage bands: consensus summaries at low percentiles sharpen localization significantly for distinctive events such as sags, swells, and oscillatory transients, the band width indicates the reliability of each attribution, and the remaining disturbance types show class-dependent behavior. Explanation dispersion also increases under injected measurement noise and synthetic-to-field transfer, complementing predictive uncertainty. Experiments on a synthetic benchmark of 15 disturbance classes and on field-recorded sags compare the method with Monte Carlo dropout and deep ensembles under a common evaluation protocol, evaluate it against deterministic occlusion, LIME, and SHAP with localization and faithfulness metrics, and characterize the computational cost of explanation generation for grid monitoring applications.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Apr 2026.

Builds on

18 of 42 references.

References · 18

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  3. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
  4. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
  5. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
  6. 2019Generalized Intersection over Union: A Metric and A Loss for Bounding Box Regressioncited by 1,368
  7. 2018RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Modelscited by 838
  8. 2019A Simple Baseline for Bayesian Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 560
  9. 2015Weight Uncertainty in Neural Networkscited by 554
  10. 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 419
  11. 2021Laplace Redux -- Effortless Bayesian Deep Learningcited by 365
  12. 2022From Anecdotal Evidence to Quantitative Evaluation Methods: A Systematic Review on Evaluating Explainable AIcited by 302
6 more
  1. 2020Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAIcited by 126
  2. 2020How Much Can I Trust You? -- Quantifying Uncertainties in Explaining Neural Networkscited by 18
  3. 2021Explaining Bayesian Neural Networkscited by 18
  4. 2025Generalized Linear Mode Connectivity for Transformerscited by 16
  5. 2023Model-agnostic variable importance for predictive uncertainty: an entropy-based approachcited by 6
  6. 2024Uncertainty Quantification for Gradient-based Explanations in Neural Networkscited by 5

Built on by

Not cited yet.