REVIEW 3 cited by
On Baselines for Local Feature Attributions
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
High-performing predictive models, such as neural nets, usually operate as black boxes, which raises serious concerns about their interpretability. Local feature attribution methods help to explain black box models and are therefore a powerful tool for assessing the reliability and fairness of predictions. To this end, most attribution models compare the importance of input features with a reference value, often called baseline. Recent studies show that the baseline can heavily impact the quality of feature attributions. Yet, we frequently find simplistic baselines, such as the zero vector, in practice. In this paper, we show empirically that baselines can significantly alter the discriminative power of feature attributions. We conduct our analysis on tabular data sets, thus complementing recent works on image data. Besides, we propose a new taxonomy of baseline methods. Our experimental study illustrates the sensitivity of popular attribution models to the baseline, thus laying the foundation for a more in-depth discussion on sensible baseline methods for tabular data.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Reconciling Privacy and Explainability in High-Stakes: A Systematic Inquiry
Gradient-based explainers yield almost uncorrelated attributions on DP-trained chest X-ray models, so the authors recommend privatizing explanations from a non-private model instead.
-
Saliency Maps are Ambiguous: Analysis of Logical Relations on First and Second Order Attributions
On synthetic AND/OR/XOR datasets with perfectly accurate models, every tested saliency method sometimes ranks a truly irrelevant input above a necessary one, so the scores cannot be trusted as relevance rankings.
-
Sparks of Explainability: Recent Advancements in Explaining Large Vision Models
A compilation of prior peer-reviewed methods arguing that explaining vision models needs concept extraction and human alignment, not just saliency maps.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.