I-SAFE: Wasserstein Coherence Metrics for Structural Auditing of Scientific AI Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deep learning models are increasingly used in scientific prediction tasks where strong benchmark performance is often interpreted as evidence of scientifically meaningful behavior. This interpretation is fragile, as models may exploit shortcut features, dataset-specific regularities, or distributional biases that are predictive on held-out data but not aligned with domain-relevant structure. To address this limitation, we introduce the textscI-SAFE (Interventional Secure, Accurate, Fair and Explainable) framework, a post-hoc distributional auditing framework for scientific AI models centered on the Wasserstein Coherence Metric (WCM). Given a trained black-box predictor and an external structural prior encoding domain knowledge about task-relevant input structure, textscI-SAFE evaluates raw model outputs under structurally guided perturbations of the input. The proposed audit measures output-distribution coherence through three complementary metrics: a Quantile-Based Metric (QBM) for location-level coherence, the WCM for ordinal coherence, and a translation-invariant WCM variant for shape coherence. We instantiate textscI-SAFE on drug--target interaction (DTI) prediction using the Davis kinase benchmark, KLIFS (Kinase--Ligand Interaction Fingerprints and Structures) binding-pocket annotations, and three sequence-based DTI models: DeepConvDTI, DeepDTA, and TAPB. Although the models operate in a comparable predictive regime, textscI-SAFE reveals substantially different distributional response profiles, a distinction invisible to accuracy-based evaluation. The framework is model-agnostic and applicable to any domain where inputs admit a structured decomposition and an external prior is available.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 May 2026.
Builds on
24 of 41 references.
References · 24
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
- 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,998
- 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,969
- 2019Invariant Risk Minimizationcited by 1,854
- 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,156
- 2017MoleculeNet: A Benchmark for Molecular Machine Learningcited by 1,051
- 2019Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Featurescited by 953
- 2018Computational Optimal Transportcited by 780
12 more
- 2015Causal inference using invariant prediction: identification and confidence intervalscited by 536
- 2023DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Modelscited by 518
- 2021Causal Abstractions of Neural Networkscited by 422
- 2021Therapeutics Data Commons: Machine Learning Datasets and Tasks for Drug Discovery and Developmentcited by 264
- 2023Finding Alignments Between Interpretable Causal Variables and Distributed Neural Representationscited by 209
- 2018DeepDTA: Deep Drug-Target Binding Affinity Predictioncited by 173
- 2019Veridical Data Sciencecited by 66
- 2018DeepConv-DTI: Prediction of drug-target interactions via deep learning with convolution on protein sequencescited by 46
- 2024LLMScan: Causal Scan for LLM Misbehavior Detectioncited by 13
- 2025RE-IMAGINE: Symbolic Benchmark Synthesis for Reasoning Evaluationcited by 11
- 2025On Rank Graduation Metrics for High Dimensional Ordinal Datacited by 4
- 2020The Equivalence of Fourier-based and Wasserstein Metrics on Imaging Problemscited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.