Why Are You Wrong? Counterfactual Explanations for Language Grounding with 3D Objects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.06030v1
• Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 13:24:44 GMT
• Title: Why Are You Wrong? Counterfactual Explanations for Language Grounding with 3D Objects
• Authors: Tobias Preintner, Weixuan Yuan, Qi Huang, Adrian König, Thomas Bäck, Elena Raponi, Niki van Stein,
• Abstract summary: Variability in language descriptions and spatial relationships of 3D objects makes this a complex task.<n>When a model makes an incorrect prediction despite being provided with a seemingly correct object description, practitioners are left wondering: "Why is the model wrong?"<n>We present a method answering this question by generating counterfactual examples.
• Score: 0.35269907642793746
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Combining natural language and geometric shapes is an emerging research area with multiple applications in robotics and language-assisted design. A crucial task in this domain is object referent identification, which involves selecting a 3D object given a textual description of the target. Variability in language descriptions and spatial relationships of 3D objects makes this a complex task, increasing the need to better understand the behavior of neural network models in this domain. However, limited research has been conducted in this area. Specifically, when a model makes an incorrect prediction despite being provided with a seemingly correct object description, practitioners are left wondering: "Why is the model wrong?". In this work, we present a method answering this question by generating counterfactual examples. Our method takes a misclassified sample, which includes two objects and a text description, and generates an alternative yet similar formulation that would have resulted in a correct prediction by the model. We have evaluated our approach with data from the ShapeTalk dataset along with three distinct models. Our counterfactual examples maintain the structure of the original description, are semantically similar and meaningful. They reveal weaknesses in the description, model bias and enhance the understanding of the models behavior. Theses insights help practitioners to better interact with systems as well as engineers to improve models.

Related papers

• Descrip3D: Enhancing Large Language Model-based 3D Scene Understanding with Object-Level Text Descriptions [28.185661905201222]
  Descrip3D is a novel framework that explicitly encodes the relationships between objects using natural language.<n>It allows for unified reasoning across various tasks such as grounding, captioning, and question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-19T09:19:16Z)
• Distilling Coarse-to-Fine Semantic Matching Knowledge for Weakly Supervised 3D Visual Grounding [58.924180772480504]
  3D visual grounding involves finding a target object in a 3D scene that corresponds to a given sentence query. We propose to leverage weakly supervised annotations to learn the 3D visual grounding model. We design a novel semantic matching model that analyzes the semantic similarity between object proposals and sentences in a coarse-to-fine manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-18T13:49:49Z)
• ShapeShift: Superquadric-based Object Pose Estimation for Robotic Grasping [85.38689479346276]
  Current techniques heavily rely on a reference 3D object, limiting their generalizability and making it expensive to expand to new object categories. This paper proposes ShapeShift, a superquadric-based framework for object pose estimation that predicts the object's pose relative to a primitive shape which is fitted to the object.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-10T20:55:41Z)
• OCTET: Object-aware Counterfactual Explanations [29.532969342297086]
  We propose an object-centric framework for counterfactual explanation generation. Our method, inspired by recent generative modeling works, encodes the query image into a latent space that is structured to ease object-level manipulations. We conduct a set of experiments on counterfactual explanation benchmarks for driving scenes, and we show that our method can be adapted beyond classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-22T16:23:12Z)
• Inter-model Interpretability: Self-supervised Models as a Case Study [0.2578242050187029]
  We build on a recent interpretability technique called Dissect to introduce textitinter-model interpretability We project 13 top-performing self-supervised models into a Learned Concepts Embedding space that reveals proximities among models from the perspective of learned concepts. The experiment allowed us to categorize the models into three categories and revealed for the first time the type of visual concepts different tasks requires.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-24T22:50:18Z)
• Learning to Scaffold: Optimizing Model Explanations for Teaching [74.25464914078826]
  We train models on three natural language processing and computer vision tasks. We find that students trained with explanations extracted with our framework are able to simulate the teacher significantly more effectively than ones produced with previous methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-22T16:43:39Z)
• Language Grounding with 3D Objects [60.67796160959387]
  We introduce a novel reasoning task that targets both visual and non-visual language about 3D objects. We introduce several CLIP-based models for distinguishing objects. We find that adding view estimation to language grounding models improves accuracy on both SNARE and when identifying objects referred to in language on a robot platform.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-26T23:35:58Z)
• When Can Models Learn From Explanations? A Formal Framework for Understanding the Roles of Explanation Data [84.87772675171412]
  We study the circumstances under which explanations of individual data points can improve modeling performance. We make use of three existing datasets with explanations: e-SNLI, TACRED, SemEval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-03T18:57:08Z)
• Unnatural Language Inference [48.45003475966808]
  We find that state-of-the-art NLI models, such as RoBERTa and BART, are invariant to, and sometimes even perform better on, examples with randomly reordered words. Our findings call into question the idea that our natural language understanding models, and the tasks used for measuring their progress, genuinely require a human-like understanding of syntax.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-30T20:40:48Z)

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.