REVIEW 2 cited by
Evolving Interpretable Visual Classifiers with Large Language Models
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
Multimodal pre-trained models, such as CLIP, are popular for zero-shot classification due to their open-vocabulary flexibility and high performance. However, vision-language models, which compute similarity scores between images and class labels, are largely black-box, with limited interpretability, risk for bias, and inability to discover new visual concepts not written down. Moreover, in practical settings, the vocabulary for class names and attributes of specialized concepts will not be known, preventing these methods from performing well on images uncommon in large-scale vision-language datasets. To address these limitations, we present a novel method that discovers interpretable yet discriminative sets of attributes for visual recognition. We introduce an evolutionary search algorithm that uses a large language model and its in-context learning abilities to iteratively mutate a concept bottleneck of attributes for classification. Our method produces state-of-the-art, interpretable fine-grained classifiers. We outperform the latest baselines by 18.4% on five fine-grained iNaturalist datasets and by 22.2% on two KikiBouba datasets, despite the baselines having access to privileged information about class names.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Test-Time Optimization for Domain Adaptive Open Vocabulary Segmentation
A plug-and-play test-time optimization method improves zero-shot open-vocabulary segmentation on specialized-domain datasets by jointly tuning per-category text embeddings and aggregating visual features.
-
Explainability for Vision Foundation Models: A Survey
A structured review of 122 papers on explainability for vision foundation models, with a taxonomy and the finding that quantitative evaluation is rare (36%).
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.