Scaling Vision Models Does Not Consistently Improve Localisation-Based Explanation Quality

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.10142v1
• Date: Mon, 11 May 2026 07:51:33 GMT
• Title: Scaling Vision Models Does Not Consistently Improve Localisation-Based Explanation Quality
• Abstract summary: We evaluate 11 computer vision models representing increasing levels of depth and complexity.<n>For each model, we generate explanations using five post-hoc explainable AI methods.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence models are increasingly scaled to improve predictive accuracy, yet it remains unclear whether scale improves the quality of post-hoc explanations. We investigate this relationship by evaluating 11 computer vision models representing increasing levels of depth and complexity within the ResNet, DenseNet, and Vision Transformer families, trained from scratch or pretrained, across three image datasets with ground-truth segmentation masks. For each model, we generate explanations using five post-hoc explainable AI methods and quantify mask alignment using two localisation metrics: Relevance Rank Accuracy (Arras et al., 2022) and the proposed Dual-Polarity Precision, which measures positive attributions inside the class mask and negative attributions outside it. Across datasets and methods, increasing architectural depth and parameter count does not improve explanation quality in most statistical comparisons, and smaller models often match or exceed deeper variants. While pretraining typically improves predictive performance and increases the dependence of explanations on learned weights, it does not consistently increase localisation scores. We also observe scenarios in which models achieve strong predictive performance while localisation precision is near zero, suggesting that performance metrics alone may not indicate whether predictions are based on the annotated regions. These results indicate that larger models do not reliably provide higher-quality explanations, and that explainability should therefore be assessed explicitly during model selection for safety-sensitive deployments.

Related papers

• What properties of reasoning supervision are associated with improved downstream model quality? [3.5354214473997225]
  We propose a suite of quantitative measures and evaluate their predictive power by fine-tuning 8B and 11B models on semantically distinct variants of a Polish reasoning dataset.<n>Our analysis reveals that these intrinsic metrics demonstrate strong and significant correlations with downstream model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T10:04:38Z)
• Explaining Machine Learning Predictive Models through Conditional Expectation Methods [0.0]
  MUCE is a model-agnostic method for local explainability designed to capture prediction changes from feature interactions.<n>Two quantitative indices, stability and uncertainty, summarize local behavior and assess model reliability.<n>Results show that MUCE effectively captures complex local model behavior, while the stability and uncertainty indices provide meaningful insight into prediction confidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-12T08:34:36Z)
• Advancing Text Classification with Large Language Models and Neural Attention Mechanisms [11.31737492247233]
  The framework includes text encoding, contextual representation modeling, attention-based enhancement, and classification prediction.<n>Results show that the proposed method outperforms existing models on all metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-10T09:18:41Z)
• Did Models Sufficient Learn? Attribution-Guided Training via Subset-Selected Counterfactual Augmentation [61.248535801314375]
  Subset-Selected Counterfactual Augmentation (SS-CA)<n>We develop Counterfactual LIMA to identify minimal spatial region sets whose removal can selectively alter model predictions.<n>Experiments show that SS-CA improves generalization on in-distribution (ID) test data and achieves superior performance on out-of-distribution (OOD) benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-15T08:39:22Z)
• Improving Network Interpretability via Explanation Consistency Evaluation [56.14036428778861]
  We propose a framework that acquires more explainable activation heatmaps and simultaneously increase the model performance. Specifically, our framework introduces a new metric, i.e., explanation consistency, to reweight the training samples adaptively in model learning. Our framework then promotes the model learning by paying closer attention to those training samples with a high difference in explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T17:20:08Z)
• The Inter-Intra Modal Measure: A Predictive Lens on Fine-Tuning Outcomes in Vision-Language Models [6.7181844004432385]
  We introduce the Inter-Intra Modal Measure (IIMM) - a predictive metric that quantifies the relationship between intra-modal image embedding similarity and inter-modal misalignment.<n>Compared to existing transferability measures, the IIMM demonstrates significantly stronger predictive power for accuracy changes post fine-tuning in dual-encoder models.<n>We provide a theoretical bound, proving that changes in IIMM are limited by the Wasserstein distance between pre- and post-fine-tuning embedding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-22T15:35:09Z)
• QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
  We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights. We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z)
• VisFIS: Visual Feature Importance Supervision with Right-for-the-Right-Reason Objectives [84.48039784446166]
  We show that model FI supervision can meaningfully improve VQA model accuracy as well as performance on several Right-for-the-Right-Reason metrics. Our best performing method, Visual Feature Importance Supervision (VisFIS), outperforms strong baselines on benchmark VQA datasets. Predictions are more accurate when explanations are plausible and faithful, and not when they are plausible but not faithful.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-22T17:02:01Z)
• Post-mortem on a deep learning contest: a Simpson's paradox and the complementary roles of scale metrics versus shape metrics [61.49826776409194]
  We analyze a corpus of models made publicly-available for a contest to predict the generalization accuracy of neural network (NN) models. We identify what amounts to a Simpson's paradox: where "scale" metrics perform well overall but perform poorly on sub partitions of the data. We present two novel shape metrics, one data-independent, and the other data-dependent, which can predict trends in the test accuracy of a series of NNs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-01T19:19:49Z)
• Closer Look at the Uncertainty Estimation in Semantic Segmentation under Distributional Shift [2.05617385614792]
  Uncertainty estimation for the task of semantic segmentation is evaluated under a varying level of domain shift. It was shown that simple color transformations already provide a strong baseline. ensemble of models was utilized in the self-training setting to improve the pseudo-labels generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-31T19:50:43Z)
• Diversity inducing Information Bottleneck in Model Ensembles [73.80615604822435]
  In this paper, we target the problem of generating effective ensembles of neural networks by encouraging diversity in prediction. We explicitly optimize a diversity inducing adversarial loss for learning latent variables and thereby obtain diversity in the output predictions necessary for modeling multi-modal data. Compared to the most competitive baselines, we show significant improvements in classification accuracy, under a shift in the data distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-10T03:10:41Z)

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.