mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Assessing Reliability of Symbol Detection in Concept Bottleneck Models

arXiv 2606.16535 ↗First posted 15 Jun 2026cs.LG cs.CV cs.SCcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) are a relevant tool for explainable Artificial Intelligence because they make their predictions through human-interpretable symbols. However, high task accuracy does not guarantee that these symbols are detected faithfully: jointly trained CBMs may encode task-specific shortcuts in the bottleneck, making their explanations unreliable. In this paper, we study concept-detection reliability by swapping independently trained concept detectors and classification heads that share the same symbolic vocabulary. We use the resulting performance degradation, concept-level metrics, and symbol-wise uncertainty estimates to identify concepts that are especially prone to spurious firing. Finally, we propose a reliability-aware training strategy in which a shared concept detector is optimized with multiple classification heads and penalized for relying on globally or instance-wise unreliable symbols. On CUB-200-2011 with full concept supervision, detectors and heads are almost freely interchangeable (swap drop below one accuracy point, relative retention above 99%, and no concept detected below chance), whereas on a controlled synthetic task we show that, as the concept-supervision weight is reduced, models keep near-perfect task accuracy while swapped accuracy and agreement with the ground-truth concepts collapse to chance. Our reliability-aware training substantially mitigates this leakage, roughly doubling swap accuracy in the leaky regime.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2026.

Builds on

19 of 23 references.

References · 19

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
  3. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
  4. 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,287
  5. 2020Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 1,032
  6. 2019Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty in Machine Learning: An Introduction to Concepts and Methodscited by 913
  7. 2020Simple and Principled Uncertainty Estimation with Deterministic Deep Learning via Distance Awarenesscited by 389
  8. 2022Post-hoc Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 293
  9. 2023Label-Free Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 285
  10. 2021Deep Deterministic Uncertainty: A Simple Baselinecited by 200
  11. 2020Hyperparameter Ensembles for Robustness and Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 150
  12. 2020Uncertainty Quantification and Deep Ensemblescited by 139
7 more
  1. 2021Promises and Pitfalls of Black-Box Concept Learning Modelscited by 131
  2. 2022Quantifying Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty in Machine Learning: Are Conditional Entropy and Mutual Information Appropriate Measures?cited by 125
  3. 2021Do Concept Bottleneck Models Learn as Intended?cited by 116
  4. 2023Interpretable Neural-Symbolic Concept Reasoningcited by 57
  5. 2024Causal Concept Graph Models: Beyond Causal Opacity in Deep Learningcited by 29
  6. 2023ARTxAI: Explainable Artificial Intelligence Curates Deep Representation Learning for Artistic Images using Fuzzy Techniquescited by 10
  7. 2025There Was Never a Bottleneck in Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 8

Built on by

Not cited yet.