Good-looking but Lacking Faithfulness: Understanding Local Explanation Methods through Trend-based Testing

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.05679v1
• Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2023 14:44:39 GMT
• Title: Good-looking but Lacking Faithfulness: Understanding Local Explanation Methods through Trend-based Testing
• Authors: Jinwen He, Kai Chen, Guozhu Meng, Jiangshan Zhang, Congyi Li
• Abstract summary: We evaluate the faithfulness of explanation methods and find that traditional tests on faithfulness encounter the random dominance problem. Benefiting from the trend tests, we successfully assess the explanation methods on complex data for the first time.
• Score: 13.076171586649528
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: While enjoying the great achievements brought by deep learning (DL), people are also worried about the decision made by DL models, since the high degree of non-linearity of DL models makes the decision extremely difficult to understand. Consequently, attacks such as adversarial attacks are easy to carry out, but difficult to detect and explain, which has led to a boom in the research on local explanation methods for explaining model decisions. In this paper, we evaluate the faithfulness of explanation methods and find that traditional tests on faithfulness encounter the random dominance problem, \ie, the random selection performs the best, especially for complex data. To further solve this problem, we propose three trend-based faithfulness tests and empirically demonstrate that the new trend tests can better assess faithfulness than traditional tests on image, natural language and security tasks. We implement the assessment system and evaluate ten popular explanation methods. Benefiting from the trend tests, we successfully assess the explanation methods on complex data for the first time, bringing unprecedented discoveries and inspiring future research. Downstream tasks also greatly benefit from the tests. For example, model debugging equipped with faithful explanation methods performs much better for detecting and correcting accuracy and security problems.

Related papers

• Leveraging LLM Parametric Knowledge for Fact Checking without Retrieval [60.25608870901428]
  Trustworthiness is a core research challenge for agentic AI systems built on Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We propose the task of fact-checking without retrieval, focusing on the verification of arbitrary natural language claims, independent of their source robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-05T18:42:51Z)
• Demystifying deep search: a holistic evaluation with hint-free multi-hop questions and factorised metrics [89.1999907891494]
  We present WebDetective, a benchmark of hint-free multi-hop questions paired with a controlled Wikipedia sandbox.<n>Our evaluation of 25 state-of-the-art models reveals systematic weaknesses across all architectures.<n>We develop an agentic workflow, EvidenceLoop, that explicitly targets the challenges our benchmark identifies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T07:59:03Z)
• False Sense of Security: Why Probing-based Malicious Input Detection Fails to Generalize [30.448801772258644]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can comply with harmful instructions, raising serious safety concerns despite their impressive capabilities.<n>Recent work has leveraged probing-based approaches to study the separability of malicious and benign inputs in LLMs' internal representations.<n>Motivated by poor out-of-distribution performance, we hypothesize that probes learn superficial patterns rather than semantic harmfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-04T05:15:55Z)
• Dancing with Critiques: Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Stepwise Natural Language Self-Critique [66.94905631175209]
  We propose a novel inference-time scaling approach -- stepwise natural language self-critique (PANEL)<n>It employs self-generated natural language critiques as feedback to guide the step-level search process.<n>This approach bypasses the need for task-specific verifiers and the associated training overhead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T17:59:55Z)
• Causality can systematically address the monsters under the bench(marks) [64.36592889550431]
  Benchmarks are plagued by various biases, artifacts, or leakage. Models may behave unreliably due to poorly explored failure modes. causality offers an ideal framework to systematically address these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T17:01:37Z)
• Leveraging Reasoning with Guidelines to Elicit and Utilize Knowledge for Enhancing Safety Alignment [63.15719512614899]
  Refusal Training (RT) struggles to generalize against various OOD jailbreaking attacks. We observe significant improvements on generalization as N increases. We propose training model to perform safety reasoning for each query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-06T13:01:44Z)
• R-Tuning: Instructing Large Language Models to Say `I Don't Know' [66.11375475253007]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized numerous domains with their impressive performance but still face their challenges. Previous instruction tuning methods force the model to complete a sentence no matter whether the model knows the knowledge or not. We present a new approach called Refusal-Aware Instruction Tuning (R-Tuning) Experimental results demonstrate R-Tuning effectively improves a model's ability to answer known questions and refrain from answering unknown questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T08:45:44Z)
• Testing for Overfitting [0.0]
  We discuss the overfitting problem and explain why standard and concentration results do not hold for evaluation with training data. We introduce and argue for a hypothesis test by means of which both model performance may be evaluated using training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-09T22:49:55Z)
• Delving into Identify-Emphasize Paradigm for Combating Unknown Bias [52.76758938921129]
  We propose an effective bias-conflicting scoring method (ECS) to boost the identification accuracy. We also propose gradient alignment (GA) to balance the contributions of the mined bias-aligned and bias-conflicting samples. Experiments are conducted on multiple datasets in various settings, demonstrating that the proposed solution can mitigate the impact of unknown biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-22T14:50:24Z)
• A Call to Reflect on Evaluation Practices for Failure Detection in Image Classification [0.491574468325115]
  We present a large-scale empirical study for the first time enabling benchmarking confidence scoring functions. The revelation of a simple softmax response baseline as the overall best performing method underlines the drastic shortcomings of current evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-28T12:25:27Z)
• Reliability-Aware Prediction via Uncertainty Learning for Person Image Retrieval [51.83967175585896]
  UAL aims at providing reliability-aware predictions by considering data uncertainty and model uncertainty simultaneously. Data uncertainty captures the noise" inherent in the sample, while model uncertainty depicts the model's confidence in the sample's prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-24T17:53:20Z)
• A Unified End-to-End Retriever-Reader Framework for Knowledge-based VQA [67.75989848202343]
  This paper presents a unified end-to-end retriever-reader framework towards knowledge-based VQA. We shed light on the multi-modal implicit knowledge from vision-language pre-training models to mine its potential in knowledge reasoning. Our scheme is able to not only provide guidance for knowledge retrieval, but also drop these instances potentially error-prone towards question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T02:35:04Z)
• Challenges in Applying Explainability Methods to Improve the Fairness of NLP Models [7.022948483613113]
  Motivations for methods in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) often include detecting, quantifying and mitigating bias. In this paper, we briefly review trends in explainability and fairness in NLP research, identify the current practices in which explainability methods are applied to detect and mitigate bias, and investigate the barriers preventing XAI methods from being used more widely in tackling fairness issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T15:09:04Z)
• Principled Knowledge Extrapolation with GANs [92.62635018136476]
  We study counterfactual synthesis from a new perspective of knowledge extrapolation. We show that an adversarial game with a closed-form discriminator can be used to address the knowledge extrapolation problem. Our method enjoys both elegant theoretical guarantees and superior performance in many scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-21T08:39:42Z)
• Explain, Edit, and Understand: Rethinking User Study Design for Evaluating Model Explanations [97.91630330328815]
  We conduct a crowdsourcing study, where participants interact with deception detection models that have been trained to distinguish between genuine and fake hotel reviews. We observe that for a linear bag-of-words model, participants with access to the feature coefficients during training are able to cause a larger reduction in model confidence in the testing phase when compared to the no-explanation control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-17T18:29:56Z)
• Multicriteria interpretability driven Deep Learning [0.0]
  Deep Learning methods are renowned for their performances, yet their lack of interpretability prevents them from high-stakes contexts. Recent model methods address this problem by providing post-hoc interpretability methods by reverse-engineering the model's inner workings. We propose a Multicriteria agnostic technique that allows to control the feature effects on the model's outcome by injecting knowledge in the objective function.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-28T09:41:13Z)
• Uncertainty-Aware Reliable Text Classification [21.517852608625127]
  Deep neural networks have significantly contributed to the success in predictive accuracy for classification tasks. They tend to make over-confident predictions in real-world settings, where domain shifting and out-of-distribution examples exist. We propose an inexpensive framework that adopts both auxiliary outliers and pseudo off-manifold samples to train the model with prior knowledge of a certain class.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-15T04:39:55Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.