Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

"Will You Find These Shortcuts?" A Protocol for Evaluating the Faithfulness of Input Salience Methods for Text Classification

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 2111.07367 v2 pith:HTPJRHTI submitted 2021-11-14 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords methodsmodelprotocolshortcutsfaithfulnessfeatureimportanceinput
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Feature attribution a.k.a. input salience methods which assign an importance score to a feature are abundant but may produce surprisingly different results for the same model on the same input. While differences are expected if disparate definitions of importance are assumed, most methods claim to provide faithful attributions and point at the features most relevant for a model's prediction. Existing work on faithfulness evaluation is not conclusive and does not provide a clear answer as to how different methods are to be compared. Focusing on text classification and the model debugging scenario, our main contribution is a protocol for faithfulness evaluation that makes use of partially synthetic data to obtain ground truth for feature importance ranking. Following the protocol, we do an in-depth analysis of four standard salience method classes on a range of datasets and shortcuts for BERT and LSTM models and demonstrate that some of the most popular method configurations provide poor results even for simplest shortcuts. We recommend following the protocol for each new task and model combination to find the best method for identifying shortcuts.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Local Additive Feature Attribution: A Mathematical Taxonomy and Reporting Checklist

    cs.LG 2026-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

    Local additive feature-attribution methods are only interpretable relative to stated choices about value functions, baselines, paths, perturbation distributions, and conservation rules.

Pith tools