Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Testing DNN Image Classifiers for Confusion & Bias Errors

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1905.07831 v3 pith:U7V337K7 submitted 2019-05-20 cs.SE cs.CVcs.LG

Testing DNN Image Classifiers for Confusion & Bias Errors

classification cs.SE cs.CVcs.LG
keywords imageclassifierserrorsbiasconfusionsoftwaretestingclass
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Image classifiers are an important component of today's software, from consumer and business applications to safety-critical domains. The advent of Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) is the key catalyst behind such wide-spread success. However, wide adoption comes with serious concerns about the robustness of software systems dependent on DNNs for image classification, as several severe erroneous behaviors have been reported under sensitive and critical circumstances. We argue that developers need to rigorously test their software's image classifiers and delay deployment until acceptable. We present an approach to testing image classifier robustness based on class property violations. We found that many of the reported erroneous cases in popular DNN image classifiers occur because the trained models confuse one class with another or show biases towards some classes over others. These bugs usually violate some class properties of one or more of those classes. Most DNN testing techniques focus on per-image violations, so fail to detect class-level confusions or biases. We developed a testing technique to automatically detect class-based confusion and bias errors in DNN-driven image classification software. We evaluated our implementation, DeepInspect, on several popular image classifiers with precision up to 100% (avg.~72.6%) for confusion errors, and up to 84.3% (avg.~66.8%) for bias errors. DeepInspect found hundreds of classification mistakes in widely-used models, many exposing errors indicating confusion or bias.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Understanding and evaluating computer vision models through the lens of counterfactuals

    cs.CV 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0

    Counterfactual-based methods for concept attribution in classifiers and for dynamic bias evaluation and mitigation in text-to-image models.