REVIEW 1 cited by
TAX: Tendency-and-Assignment Explainer for Semantic Segmentation with Multi-Annotators
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
read the original abstract
To understand how deep neural networks perform classification predictions, recent research attention has been focusing on developing techniques to offer desirable explanations. However, most existing methods cannot be easily applied for semantic segmentation; moreover, they are not designed to offer interpretability under the multi-annotator setting. Instead of viewing ground-truth pixel-level labels annotated by a single annotator with consistent labeling tendency, we aim at providing interpretable semantic segmentation and answer two critical yet practical questions: "who" contributes to the resulting segmentation, and "why" such an assignment is determined. In this paper, we present a learning framework of Tendency-and-Assignment Explainer (TAX), designed to offer interpretability at the annotator and assignment levels. More specifically, we learn convolution kernel subsets for modeling labeling tendencies of each type of annotation, while a prototype bank is jointly observed to offer visual guidance for learning the above kernels. For evaluation, we consider both synthetic and real-world datasets with multi-annotators. We show that our TAX can be applied to state-of-the-art network architectures with comparable performances, while segmentation interpretability at both levels can be offered accordingly.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
QuMAB: Query-based Multi-Annotator Behavior Modeling with Reliability under Sparse Labels
QuMAB models each annotator with a lightweight query in a cross-attention network, reconstructs missing labels, and reports accuracy gains over aggregation baselines on two new dense-label datasets.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.