REVIEW 1 cited by
How to Not Measure Disentanglement
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
To evaluate disentangled representations several metrics have been proposed. However, theoretical guarantees for conventional metrics of disentanglement are missing. Moreover, conventional metrics do not have a consistent correlation with the outcomes of qualitative studies. In this paper we analyze metrics of disentanglement and their properties. We conclude that existing metrics of disentanglement were created to reflect different characteristics of disentanglement and do not satisfy two basic desirable properties: (1) assign a high score to representations that are disentangled according to the definition; and (2) assign a low score to representations that are entangled according to the definition. In addition, we propose a new metric of disentanglement and prove that it satisfies both of the properties.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Towards a Unified Representation Evaluation Framework Beyond Downstream Tasks
A unified representation evaluation protocol shows that models with similar downstream accuracy differ substantially in informativeness, equivariance, invariance, and disentanglement.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.