Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 162 references

AIM: Amending Inherent Interpretability via Self-Supervised Masking

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read Self-supervised masking steers neural networks away from spurious features

desk verdict Clean idea with a plausible mechanism, but the abstract undersells the evidence and EPG is a shaky faithfulness proxy; worth a referee but not a citation yet. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.11502 v1 pith:EUAUCUEX submitted 2025-08-15 cs.CV

classification cs.CV
keywords interpretabilityself-supervisedlearningfeaturemaskingspuriousfeaturesenergypointinggameout-of-distributiongeneralizationfine-grainedclassification
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

AIM (Amending Inherent Interpretability via Self-Supervised Masking) is a training method that makes deep neural networks rely on genuine, meaningful features instead of spurious correlations, without requiring any extra annotations. It uses features from multiple encoding stages to guide a sample-specific masking process during training. The paper reports that this simple approach consistently improves both interpretability, as measured by the Energy Pointing Game (EPG) score, and classification accuracy across diverse benchmarks including ImageNet100, HardImageNet, ImageWoof, Waterbirds, TravelingBirds, and CUB-200. If correct, AIM offers a practical way to build models that are both accurate and inherently interpretable, with better out-of-distribution generalization.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is a self-supervised, sample-specific masking process that uses features from multiple encoding stages of the network to decide which input regions to mask during training. This forces the model to rely less on potentially spurious cues and more on genuine, discriminative features, without needing any label-based annotation of which features are spurious.

What would settle it

If, on a dataset with a known spurious correlation (e.g., Waterbirds background), running AIM with random masking instead of feature-guided masking produces the same EPG and accuracy gains, then the specific multi-stage guidance is not the cause; or, if AIM fails to improve EPG on a held-out set of images specifically chosen to expose spurious-feature reliance, the core claim would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a self-supervised, sample-specific feature-masking process, guided by features at multiple encoding stages, can amend a network's inherent interpretability by suppressing spurious features while preserving genuine ones. The paper demonstrates that models trained with AIM achieve significantly higher Energy Pointing Game (EPG) scores and improved accuracy compared to strong baselines across general-purpose and fine-grained classification datasets. This dual benefit holds across diverse domains and architectures, supporting the conclusion that AIM promotes the use of genuine, human-aligned features that directly contribute to better generalization and interpretability

Load-bearing premise

The method relies on the assumption that the self-supervised, multi-stage feature guidance can reliably identify and suppress spurious features while preserving genuine ones, without any external annotations or supervision about which features are spurious.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Models trained with AIM are expected to produce saliency maps that more faithfully reflect the true decision process, as quantified by higher EPG scores.
  • The accuracy gains reported across datasets suggest that reducing reliance on spurious features also improves out-of-distribution generalization.
  • Because AIM requires no additional annotations, it can be applied to a wide range of existing architectures and datasets without extra labeling cost.
  • The consistent gains across general-purpose and fine-grained benchmarks indicate that the method addresses a general weakness of deep networks, not a niche artifact.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • AIM's masking may act as a form of implicit regularization that prevents shortcut learning; testing it on additional spurious-correlation benchmarks could clarify this role.
  • The multi-stage feature guidance could be adapted to other self-supervised objectives, such as contrastive learning, to inject interpretability earlier in representation learning.
  • A direct ablation replacing the feature-guided masking with random masking would test whether the specific guidance is what drives the gains, or whether any masking suffices.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes AIM (Amending Inherent Interpretability via Self-Supervised Masking), a method that uses features at multiple encoding stages to create sample-specific, annotation-free masks that suppress spurious features and promote genuine ones. The abstract claims that AIM trains models that are both well-performing and inherently interpretable, yielding significant gains in Energy Pointing Game (EPG) score and accuracy across several challenging datasets (ImageNet100, HardImageNet, ImageWoof, Waterbirds, TravelingBirds, CUB-200). The submitted text contains only the abstract; no method details, equations, experimental tables, or code are available.

Significance. If the claimed results hold, AIM would be a meaningful advance toward interpretable deep learning without additional annotations, addressing both OOD generalization and human-aligned feature use. The high-level idea is plausible and the evaluation plan is broad. However, the provided material is only an abstract, and the key evidence cited (EPG) is a proxy that may not establish genuine feature use. The absence of quantitative comparisons, error bars, ablations, and an analysis of which features were masked makes it impossible to verify the central claim. The potential is real, but the current evidence is insufficient.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The claim that AIM yields models that 'faithfully summarize the decision process' is supported in the abstract only by the Energy Pointing Game (EPG) score. EPG is a pointing-game metric that measures spatial overlap between the peak of an attribution map and a human-annotated mask; a high EPG can be achieved by a model that attends to any discriminative region within the object, including a spurious cue (e.g., texture or watermark-like artifact) that lies inside the annotated area. Therefore, an EPG improvement does not, by itself, demonstrate that the model now uses 'genuine' features or that the self-supervised masking correctly identified spurious ones. A causal faithfulness metric (e.g., intervention-based tests) or a direct analysis of masked features is needed to support the central claim.
  2. [Abstract] The masking process is guided by 'features at multiple encoding stages.' If the attribution method used to compute EPG also relies on these multi-stage features, then the observed EPG gain may be an artifact of the masking sharpening the representations used by the explainer, rather than reflecting a substantive change in the model's decision behavior. The abstract does not specify what attribution method is used or whether it is independent of the masking pathway. This should be clarified, and an experiment decoupling the explainer from the masking mechanism should be reported.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract reports 'significant gains' and 'consistent gains across domains and architectures' but gives no quantitative values, no baseline names, no error bars, and no statistical tests. Without these, the magnitude and robustness of the improvements cannot be assessed. In particular, the accuracy gains on datasets such as Waterbirds are often attributed to reduced spurious correlation; the abstract does not state how much of the gain comes from the interpretability mechanism versus standard augmentation or regularization effects. Please provide numerical results and an ablation of the masking component.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The term 'inherent interpretability' is used but not defined; it would help to distinguish it from post-hoc explainability approaches and from architectures that are interpretable by design.
  2. [Abstract] ImageWoof is a subset of ImageNet; referring to it as a general-purpose benchmark may be imprecise. Also, no references are given for the datasets or for EPG.
  3. [Abstract] The phrase 'sample-specific feature-masking process' lacks detail: what is the mask shape, are masks binary or soft, and how are they generated from multi-stage features? A sentence or two in the abstract would help the reader.
  4. [Abstract] The statement 'across domains and architectures' is vague. Which architectures were tested? One or two lines would strengthen the claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity identified from the available abstract; EPG evidence is an evidential-strength concern, not a definitional reduction.

full rationale

The available text is only the abstract; no equations, training objectives, or evaluation protocols are specified. AIM is described as using multi-stage features to guide self-supervised, sample-specific masking, with improvements measured by Energy Pointing Game (EPG) and accuracy. There is no statement that EPG is optimized during training, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no self-citation chain invoked to force a conclusion. The claim that EPG gains demonstrate faithful summarization could be questioned as an evaluation-validity issue (EPG rewards peak-overlap with human masks and may improve without causal feature use), but that is a correctness risk, not circularity. Without access to the method details, one cannot exhibit a specific reduction such as Eq. X being defined in terms of Eq. Y or a metric being optimized and then reported as a prediction. Therefore, the honest finding is no significant circularity, score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No additional free parameters, new entities, or untested constructs are introduced in the abstract. The assumptions listed are domain-specific premises that the method's success depends on.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Multi-stage features provide a reliable signal for distinguishing genuine from spurious features in a sample-specific manner.
    AIM's masking is guided by features from multiple encoding stages; without this, the method cannot select what to mask.
  • domain assumption Masking spurious features during training does not prevent learning of genuine discriminative features.
    The training objective assumes that the model can still learn from the remaining (unmasked) information.
  • domain assumption EPG score is a valid proxy for human-aligned interpretability and improves monotonically with genuine feature usage.
    The paper uses EPG as the interpretability metric; if EPG is not aligned with human judgments, the claimed interpretability benefit is weak.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AIM: Amending Inherent Interpretability via Self-Supervised Masking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EUAUCUEX

@misc{pith2026250811502,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AIM: Amending Inherent Interpretability via Self-Supervised Masking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EUAUCUEX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.11502}
}
read the original abstract

It has been observed that deep neural networks (DNNs) often use both genuine as well as spurious features. In this work, we propose "Amending Inherent Interpretability via Self-Supervised Masking" (AIM), a simple yet interestingly effective method that promotes the network's utilization of genuine features over spurious alternatives without requiring additional annotations. In particular, AIM uses features at multiple encoding stages to guide a self-supervised, sample-specific feature-masking process. As a result, AIM enables the training of well-performing and inherently interpretable models that faithfully summarize the decision process. We validate AIM across a diverse range of challenging datasets that test both out-of-distribution generalization and fine-grained visual understanding. These include general-purpose classification benchmarks such as ImageNet100, HardImageNet, and ImageWoof, as well as fine-grained classification datasets such as Waterbirds, TravelingBirds, and CUB-200. AIM demonstrates significant dual benefits: interpretability improvements, as measured by the Energy Pointing Game (EPG) score, and accuracy gains over strong baselines. These consistent gains across domains and architectures provide compelling evidence that AIM promotes the use of genuine and meaningful features that directly contribute to improved generalization and human-aligned interpretability.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

162 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    ICML Workshop on Uncertainty and Robustness in Deep Learning (UDL) , year=

    Towards improving robustness of compressed CNNs , author=. ICML Workshop on Uncertainty and Robustness in Deep Learning (UDL) , year=

  2. [2]

    2024 , url=

    Roll the dice: Monte Carlo Downsampling as a low-cost Adversarial Defence , author=. 2024 , url=

  3. [3]

    Synthetic Data for Computer Vision Workshop@ CVPR 2025 , year=

    Corner Cases: How Size and Position of Objects Challenge ImageNet-Trained Models , author=. Synthetic Data for Computer Vision Workshop@ CVPR 2025 , year=

  4. [4]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.22399 , year=

    VITAL: More Understandable Feature Visualization through Distribution Alignment and Relevant Information Flow , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.22399 , year=

  5. [5]

    International conference on machine learning , pages=

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision , author=. International conference on machine learning , pages=. 2021 , organization=

  6. [6]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.08415 , year=

    Gaussian error linear units (gelus) , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.08415 , year=

  7. [7]

    2017 , url=

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter , booktitle=. 2017 , url=

  8. [8]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

    Decoupled Weight Decay Regularization , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

Show all 162 references
  1. [9]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 , year=

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 , year=

  2. [10]

    What and where: A Bayesian inference theory of attention , journal =

    Sharat Chikkerur and Thomas Serre and Cheston Tan and Tomaso Poggio , keywords =. What and where: A Bayesian inference theory of attention , journal =. 2010 , note =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2010.05.013 , url =

  3. [11]

    Neuroreport , volume=

    Bayesian inference and attentional modulation in the visual cortex , author=. Neuroreport , volume=. 2005 , publisher=

  4. [12]

    Top-down influence in early visual processing: a Bayesian perspective , journal =

    Tai Sing Lee , keywords =. Top-down influence in early visual processing: a Bayesian perspective , journal =. 2002 , issn =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9384(02)00903-4 , url =

  5. [13]

    Interactions of top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in human visual cortex

    McMains, Stephanie and Kastner, Sabine. Interactions of top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in human visual cortex. J Neurosci

  6. [14]

    Nature reviews neuroscience , volume=

    Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain , author=. Nature reviews neuroscience , volume=. 2002 , publisher=

  7. [15]

    Nature reviews neuroscience , volume=

    Computational modelling of visual attention , author=. Nature reviews neuroscience , volume=. 2001 , publisher=

  8. [16]

    Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    Deep residual learning for image recognition , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

  9. [17]

    nature , volume=

    Deep learning , author=. nature , volume=. 2015 , publisher=

  10. [18]

    International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

    Examining and combating spurious features under distribution shift , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2021 , organization=

  11. [19]

    Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV) , pages=

    Recognition in terra incognita , author=. Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV) , pages=

  12. [20]

    International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

    Salient ImageNet: How to discover spurious features in Deep Learning? , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

  13. [21]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.09994 , year=

    Noise or signal: The role of image backgrounds in object recognition , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.09994 , year=

  14. [22]

    Nature Machine Intelligence , volume=

    Shortcut learning in deep neural networks , author=. Nature Machine Intelligence , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

  15. [23]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.12231 , year=

    ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustness , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.12231 , year=

  16. [24]

    , booktitle=

    Torralba, Antonio and Efros, Alexei A. , booktitle=. Unbiased look at dataset bias , year=

  17. [25]

    European conference on computer vision , pages=

    Revisiting visual question answering baselines , author=. European conference on computer vision , pages=. 2016 , organization=

  18. [27]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.02893 , year=

    Invariant risk minimization , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.02893 , year=

  19. [28]

    IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , volume=

    Invariant scattering convolution networks , author=. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

  20. [29]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.00760 , year=

    Approximating cnns with bag-of-local-features models works surprisingly well on imagenet , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.00760 , year=

  21. [30]

    Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency , pages=

    Removing spurious features can hurt accuracy and affect groups disproportionately , author=. Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency , pages=

  22. [31]

    Nature communications , volume=

    Unmasking Clever Hans predictors and assessing what machines really learn , author=. Nature communications , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

  23. [32]

    http://pascallin

    The pascal visual object classes challenge,(voc2007) results , author=. http://pascallin. ecs. soton. ac. uk/challenges/VOC/voc2007/index. html. , year=

  24. [33]

    , author=

    The Clever Hans phenomenon: Communication with horses, whales, apes, and people. , author=. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences , year=

  25. [34]

    Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , pages=

    Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , pages=

  26. [35]

    International conference on machine learning , pages=

    Axiomatic attribution for deep networks , author=. International conference on machine learning , pages=. 2017 , organization=

  27. [36]

    International conference on machine learning , pages=

    Learning important features through propagating activation differences , author=. International conference on machine learning , pages=. 2017 , organization=

  28. [37]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

    B-cos networks: Alignment is all we need for interpretability , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

  29. [39]

    extended abstracts of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems , pages=

    Human-AI interactive and continuous sensemaking: A case study of image classification using scribble attention maps , author=. extended abstracts of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems , pages=

  30. [40]

    Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction , volume=

    Aligning eyes between humans and deep neural network through interactive attention alignment , author=. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

  31. [41]

    proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery and data mining , pages=

    Res: A robust framework for guiding visual explanation , author=. proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery and data mining , pages=

  32. [42]

    Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society , pages=

    Explanatory interactive machine learning , author=. Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society , pages=

  33. [43]

    Proceedings of the Workshop on Interactive Adaptive Learning (IAL 2019) , pages=

    Toward faithful explanatory active learning with self-explainable neural nets , author=. Proceedings of the Workshop on Interactive Adaptive Learning (IAL 2019) , pages=. 2019 , organization=

  34. [44]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops , pages=

    Score-CAM: Score-weighted visual explanations for convolutional neural networks , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops , pages=

  35. [45]

    proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision , pages=

    Ablation-cam: Visual explanations for deep convolutional network via gradient-free localization , author=. proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision , pages=

  36. [46]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , volume=

    Layercam: Exploring hierarchical class activation maps for localization , author=. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

  37. [47]

    2018 IEEE winter conference on applications of computer vision (WACV) , pages=

    Grad-cam++: Generalized gradient-based visual explanations for deep convolutional networks , author=. 2018 IEEE winter conference on applications of computer vision (WACV) , pages=. 2018 , organization=

  38. [48]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Sanity checks for saliency maps , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

  39. [49]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

    Towards better understanding attribution methods , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

  40. [50]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.06506 , year=

    Sanity simulations for saliency methods , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.06506 , year=

  41. [51]

    Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    Do feature attribution methods correctly attribute features? , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

  42. [52]

    International conference on learning representations , year=

    Post hoc explanations may be ineffective for detecting unknown spurious correlation , author=. International conference on learning representations , year=

  43. [53]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    Attention branch network: Learning of attention mechanism for visual explanation , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

  44. [54]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Masktune: Mitigating spurious correlations by forcing to explore , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

  45. [55]

    International conference on machine learning , pages=

    Interpretations are useful: penalizing explanations to align neural networks with prior knowledge , author=. International conference on machine learning , pages=. 2020 , organization=

  46. [56]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

    On guiding visual attention with language specification , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

  47. [57]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.08285 , year=

    Identifying spurious correlations and correcting them with an explanation-based learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.08285 , year=

  48. [58]

    Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part X 16 , pages=

    Learning what makes a difference from counterfactual examples and gradient supervision , author=. Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part X 16 , pages=. 2020 , organization=

  49. [60]

    Nature Machine Intelligence , volume=

    Making deep neural networks right for the right scientific reasons by interacting with their explanations , author=. Nature Machine Intelligence , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

  50. [61]

    Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    Right for better reasons: Training differentiable models by constraining their influence functions , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

  51. [63]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

    Improving visual grounding by encouraging consistent gradient-based explanations , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

  52. [64]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Harmonizing the object recognition strategies of deep neural networks with humans , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

  53. [65]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages=

    Studying How to Efficiently and Effectively Guide Models with Explanations , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages=

  54. [66]

    2024 , eprint=

    B-cos Alignment for Inherently Interpretable CNNs and Vision Transformers , author=. 2024 , eprint=

  55. [67]

    2011 , Institution =

    The Caltech-UCSD Birds-200-2011 Dataset , Author =. 2011 , Institution =

  56. [68]

    CUB-200-2011 Segmentations , DOI=

    Farrell, Ryan , year=. CUB-200-2011 Segmentations , DOI=

  57. [69]

    Places: A 10 Million Image Database for Scene Recognition , year=

    Zhou, Bolei and Lapedriza, Agata and Khosla, Aditya and Oliva, Aude and Torralba, Antonio , journal=. Places: A 10 Million Image Database for Scene Recognition , year=

  58. [70]

    International conference on machine learning , pages=

    Concept bottleneck models , author=. International conference on machine learning , pages=. 2020 , organization=

  59. [71]

    RCA engineer , volume=

    Pyramid methods in image processing , author=. RCA engineer , volume=

  60. [72]

    Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    Feature pyramid networks for object detection , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

  61. [73]

    2022 , eprint=

    MaskTune: Mitigating Spurious Correlations by Forcing to Explore , author=. 2022 , eprint=

  62. [74]

    2023 , eprint=

    Masking Strategies for Background Bias Removal in Computer Vision Models , author=. 2023 , eprint=

  63. [75]

    International journal of computer vision , volume=

    Contextual priming for object detection , author=. International journal of computer vision , volume=. 2003 , publisher=

  64. [76]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.07682 , year=

    Emergent abilities of large language models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.07682 , year=

  65. [77]

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience , year=

    Itti, Laurent and Koch, Christof , title=. Nature Reviews Neuroscience , year=. doi:10.1038/35058500 , url=

  66. [78]

    Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    Leveraging explanations in interactive machine learning: An overview , author=. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

  67. [79]

    2024 , eprint=

    Improving Visual Grounding by Encouraging Consistent Gradient-based Explanations , author=. 2024 , eprint=

  68. [80]

    Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XI 16 , pages=

    Contrastive multiview coding , author=. Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XI 16 , pages=. 2020 , organization=

  69. [81]

    Distill , year =

    Olah, Chris and Cammarata, Nick and Schubert, Ludwig and Goh, Gabriel and Petrov, Michael and Carter, Shan , title =. Distill , year =

  70. [82]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

    Content-adaptive downsampling in convolutional neural networks , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

  71. [83]

    Dynamic Convolutions: Exploiting Spatial Sparsity for Faster Inference , url=

    Verelst, Thomas and Tuytelaars, Tinne , year=. Dynamic Convolutions: Exploiting Spatial Sparsity for Faster Inference , url=. doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00239 , booktitle=

  72. [84]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.01144 , year=

    Categorical reparameterization with gumbel-softmax , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.01144 , year=

  73. [85]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.00712 , year=

    The concrete distribution: A continuous relaxation of discrete random variables , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.00712 , year=

  74. [86]

    Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    Building a bird recognition app and large scale dataset with citizen scientists: The fine print in fine-grained dataset collection , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

  75. [87]

    2019 , eprint=

    Attention Branch Network: Learning of Attention Mechanism for Visual Explanation , author=. 2019 , eprint=

  76. [88]

    Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume=

    Deep domain-adversarial image generation for domain generalisation , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume=

  77. [89]

    GitHub repository , doi =

    Ross Wightman , title =. GitHub repository , doi =. 2019 , publisher =

  78. [90]

    2022 , eprint=

    A ConvNet for the 2020s , author=. 2022 , eprint=

  79. [91]

    2015 , eprint=

    Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition , author=. 2015 , eprint=

  80. [92]

    IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , year =

    Böhle, Moritz and Singh, Navdeeppal and Fritz, Mario and Schiele, Bernt , title =. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , year =

  81. [93]

    2019 , eprint=

    Decoupled Weight Decay Regularization , author=. 2019 , eprint=

  82. [94]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

    Dissecting the high-frequency bias in convolutional neural networks , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

  83. [95]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages=

    PDiscoNet: Semantically consistent part discovery for fine-grained recognition , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages=

  84. [96]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.14499 , year=

    Discover-then-Name: Task-Agnostic Concept Bottlenecks via Automated Concept Discovery , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.14499 , year=

  85. [97]

    2023 , eprint=

    Fine-grained Visual Classification with High-temperature Refinement and Background Suppression , author=. 2023 , eprint=

  86. [98]

    2023 , eprint=

    PDiscoNet: Semantically consistent part discovery for fine-grained recognition , author=. 2023 , eprint=

  87. [99]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , volume=

    AP-CNN: Weakly supervised attention pyramid convolutional neural network for fine-grained visual classification , author=. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

  88. [100]

    The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

    Energy-based concept bottleneck models: Unifying prediction, concept intervention, and probabilistic interpretations , author=. The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

  89. [102]

    ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database , year=

    Deng, Jia and Dong, Wei and Socher, Richard and Li, Li-Jia and Kai Li and Li Fei-Fei , booktitle=. ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database , year=

  90. [103]

    2018 , eprint=

    Densely Connected Convolutional Networks , author=. 2018 , eprint=

  91. [104]

    2020 , eprint=

    EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networks , author=. 2020 , eprint=

  92. [105]

    2017 , eprint=

    Feature Pyramid Networks for Object Detection , author=. 2017 , eprint=

  93. [107]

    2019 , month=

    Imagewoof: a subset of 10 classes from Imagenet that aren't so easy to classify , author=. 2019 , month=

  94. [108]

    openreview , month =

    Hard ImageNet: Segmentations for Objects with Strong Spurious Cues , author =. openreview , month =

  95. [109]

    and Cogswell, Michael and Das, Abhishek and Vedantam, Ramakrishna and Parikh, Devi and Batra, Dhruv , year=

    Selvaraju, Ramprasaath R. and Cogswell, Michael and Das, Abhishek and Vedantam, Ramakrishna and Parikh, Devi and Batra, Dhruv , year=. Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-Based Localization , volume=. International Journal of Computer Vision , publish...

  96. [110]

    2014 , eprint=

    Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Maps , author=. 2014 , eprint=

  97. [111]

    Berg and Li Fei-Fei , Title =

    Olga Russakovsky and Jia Deng and Hao Su and Jonathan Krause and Sanjeev Satheesh and Sean Ma and Zhiheng Huang and Andrej Karpathy and Aditya Khosla and Michael Bernstein and Alexander C. Berg and Li Fei-Fei , Title =. 2015 , journal =. doi:10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y , volume=

  98. [112]

    2025 , eprint=

    How to Probe: Simple Yet Effective Techniques for Improving Post-hoc Explanations , author=. 2025 , eprint=

  99. [113]

    2021 , eprint=

    An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale , author=. 2021 , eprint=

  100. [114]

    2021 , eprint=

    Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer using Shifted Windows , author=. 2021 , eprint=

  101. [115]

    Roll the dice: Monte carlo downsampling as a low-cost adversarial defence, 2024

    Shashank Agnihotri, Shashank Priyadarshi, Hendrik Sommerhoff, Julia Grabinski, Andreas Kolb, and Margret Keuper. Roll the dice: Monte carlo downsampling as a low-cost adversarial defence, 2024

  102. [116]

    Masktune: Mitigating spurious correlations by forcing to explore

    Saeid Asgari, Aliasghar Khani, Fereshte Khani, Ali Gholami, Linh Tran, Ali Mahdavi Amiri, and Ghassan Hamarneh. Masktune: Mitigating spurious correlations by forcing to explore. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35: 0 23284--23296, 2022

  103. [117]

    B-cos networks: Alignment is all we need for interpretability

    Moritz B \"o hle, Mario Fritz, and Bernt Schiele. B-cos networks: Alignment is all we need for interpretability. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10329--10338, 2022

  104. [118]

    Grad-cam++: Generalized gradient-based visual explanations for deep convolutional networks

    Aditya Chattopadhay, Anirban Sarkar, Prantik Howlader, and Vineeth N Balasubramanian. Grad-cam++: Generalized gradient-based visual explanations for deep convolutional networks. In 2018 IEEE winter conference on applications of computer vision (WACV), pages 839--847. IEEE, 2018

  105. [119]

    Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database

    Jia Deng, Wei Dong, Richard Socher, Li-Jia Li, Kai Li, and Li Fei-Fei. Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 248--255, 2009

  106. [120]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale, 2021

    Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weissenborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Sylvain Gelly, Jakob Uszkoreit, and Neil Houlsby. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at...

  107. [121]

    Cub-200-2011 segmentations, 2022

    Ryan Farrell. Cub-200-2011 segmentations, 2022

  108. [122]

    Corner cases: How size and position of objects challenge imagenet-trained models

    Mishal Fatima, Steffen Jung, and Margret Keuper. Corner cases: How size and position of objects challenge imagenet-trained models. In Synthetic Data for Computer Vision Workshop@ CVPR 2025, 2025

  109. [123]

    Harmonizing the object recognition strategies of deep neural networks with humans

    Thomas Fel, Ivan F Rodriguez Rodriguez, Drew Linsley, and Thomas Serre. Harmonizing the object recognition strategies of deep neural networks with humans. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35: 0 9432--9446, 2022

  110. [124]

    How to probe: Simple yet effective techniques for improving post-hoc explanations, 2025

    Siddhartha Gairola, Moritz Böhle, Francesco Locatello, and Bernt Schiele. How to probe: Simple yet effective techniques for improving post-hoc explanations, 2025

  111. [125]

    Res: A robust framework for guiding visual explanation

    Yuyang Gao, Tong Steven Sun, Guangji Bai, Siyi Gu, Sungsoo Ray Hong, and Zhao Liang. Res: A robust framework for guiding visual explanation. In proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 432--442, 2022 a

  112. [126]

    Aligning eyes between humans and deep neural network through interactive attention alignment

    Yuyang Gao, Tong Steven Sun, Liang Zhao, and Sungsoo Ray Hong. Aligning eyes between humans and deep neural network through interactive attention alignment. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6 0 (CSCW2): 0 1--28, 2022 b

  113. [127]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition, 2015

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition, 2015

  114. [128]

    Content-adaptive downsampling in convolutional neural networks

    Robin Hesse, Simone Schaub-Meyer, and Stefan Roth. Content-adaptive downsampling in convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 4544--4553, 2023

  115. [129]

    Towards improving robustness of compressed cnns

    J Hoffmann, S Agnihotri, Tonmoy Saikia, and Thomas Brox. Towards improving robustness of compressed cnns. In ICML Workshop on Uncertainty and Robustness in Deep Learning (UDL), 2021

  116. [130]

    Imagewoof: a subset of 10 classes from imagenet that aren't so easy to classify, 2019

    Jeremy Howard. Imagewoof: a subset of 10 classes from imagenet that aren't so easy to classify, 2019

  117. [131]

    Layercam: Exploring hierarchical class activation maps for localization

    Peng-Tao Jiang, Chang-Bin Zhang, Qibin Hou, Ming-Ming Cheng, and Yunchao Wei. Layercam: Exploring hierarchical class activation maps for localization. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 30: 0 5875--5888, 2021

  118. [132]

    Last layer re-training is sufficient for robustness to spurious correlations

    Polina Kirichenko, Pavel Izmailov, and Andrew Gordon Wilson. Last layer re-training is sufficient for robustness to spurious correlations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02937, 2022

  119. [133]

    Concept bottleneck models

    Pang Wei Koh, Thao Nguyen, Yew Siang Tang, Stephen Mussmann, Emma Pierson, Been Kim, and Percy Liang. Concept bottleneck models. In International conference on machine learning, pages 5338--5348. PMLR, 2020

  120. [134]

    a ldchen, Alexander Binder, Gr \'e goire Montavon, Wojciech Samek, and Klaus-Robert M \

    Sebastian Lapuschkin, Stephan W \"a ldchen, Alexander Binder, Gr \'e goire Montavon, Wojciech Samek, and Klaus-Robert M \"u ller. Unmasking clever hans predictors and assessing what machines really learn. Nature communications, 10 0 (1): 0 1096, 2019

  121. [135]

    Feature pyramid networks for object detection, 2017

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Piotr Dollár, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, Bharath Hariharan, and Serge Belongie. Feature pyramid networks for object detection, 2017

  122. [136]

    Learning what and where to attend

    Drew Linsley, Dan Shiebler, Sven Eberhardt, and Thomas Serre. Learning what and where to attend. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.08819, 2018

  123. [137]

    Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows, 2021

    Ze Liu, Yutong Lin, Yue Cao, Han Hu, Yixuan Wei, Zheng Zhang, Stephen Lin, and Baining Guo. Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows, 2021

  124. [138]

    A convnet for the 2020s, 2022

    Zhuang Liu, Hanzi Mao, Chao-Yuan Wu, Christoph Feichtenhofer, Trevor Darrell, and Saining Xie. A convnet for the 2020s, 2022

  125. [139]

    Decoupled weight decay regularization, 2019

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization, 2019

  126. [140]

    Embedding human knowledge into deep neural network via attention map

    Masahiro Mitsuhara, Hiroshi Fukui, Yusuke Sakashita, Takanori Ogata, Tsubasa Hirakawa, Takayoshi Yamashita, and Hironobu Fujiyoshi. Embedding human knowledge into deep neural network via attention map. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.03540, 2019

  127. [141]

    Hard imagenet: Segmentations for objects with strong spurious cues, 2022

    Mazda Moayeri, Sahil Singla, and Soheil Feizi. Hard imagenet: Segmentations for objects with strong spurious cues, 2022

  128. [142]

    On guiding visual attention with language specification

    Suzanne Petryk, Lisa Dunlap, Keyan Nasseri, Joseph Gonzalez, Trevor Darrell, and Anna Rohrbach. On guiding visual attention with language specification. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 18092--18102, 2022

  129. [143]

    Ablation-cam: Visual explanations for deep convolutional network via gradient-free localization

    Harish Guruprasad Ramaswamy et al. Ablation-cam: Visual explanations for deep convolutional network via gradient-free localization. In proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, pages 983--991, 2020

  130. [144]

    Studying how to efficiently and effectively guide models with explanations

    Sukrut Rao, Moritz B \"o hle, Amin Parchami-Araghi, and Bernt Schiele. Studying how to efficiently and effectively guide models with explanations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 1922--1933, 2023

  131. [145]

    Right for the right reasons: Training differentiable models by constraining their explanations

    Andrew Slavin Ross, Michael C Hughes, and Finale Doshi-Velez. Right for the right reasons: Training differentiable models by constraining their explanations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.03717, 2017

  132. [146]

    Berg, and Li Fei-Fei

    Olga Russakovsky, Jia Deng, Hao Su, Jonathan Krause, Sanjeev Satheesh, Sean Ma, Zhiheng Huang, Andrej Karpathy, Aditya Khosla, Michael Bernstein, Alexander C. Berg, and Li Fei-Fei. ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge . International Journal of Computer Vision (IJ...

  133. [147]

    Distributionally robust neural networks for group shifts: On the importance of regularization for worst-case generalization

    Shiori Sagawa, Pang Wei Koh, Tatsunori B Hashimoto, and Percy Liang. Distributionally robust neural networks for group shifts: On the importance of regularization for worst-case generalization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.08731, 2019

  134. [148]

    Making deep neural networks right for the right scientific reasons by interacting with their explanations

    Patrick Schramowski, Wolfgang Stammer, Stefano Teso, Anna Brugger, Franziska Herbert, Xiaoting Shao, Hans-Georg Luigs, Anne-Katrin Mahlein, and Kristian Kersting. Making deep neural networks right for the right scientific reasons by interacting with their explanations. Nature ...

  135. [149]

    The clever hans phenomenon: Communication with horses, whales, apes, and people

    Thomas A Sebeok and Robert Ed Rosenthal. The clever hans phenomenon: Communication with horses, whales, apes, and people. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1981

  136. [150]

    Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization

    Ramprasaath R Selvaraju, Michael Cogswell, Abhishek Das, Ramakrishna Vedantam, Devi Parikh, and Dhruv Batra. Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pages 618--626, 2017

  137. [151]

    Selvaraju, Michael Cogswell, Abhishek Das, Ramakrishna Vedantam, Devi Parikh, and Dhruv Batra

    Ramprasaath R. Selvaraju, Michael Cogswell, Abhishek Das, Ramakrishna Vedantam, Devi Parikh, and Dhruv Batra. Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. International Journal of Computer Vision, 128 0 (2): 0 336–359, 2019

  138. [152]

    Human-ai interactive and continuous sensemaking: A case study of image classification using scribble attention maps

    Haifeng Shen, Kewen Liao, Zhibin Liao, Job Doornberg, Maoying Qiao, Anton Van Den Hengel, and Johan W Verjans. Human-ai interactive and continuous sensemaking: A case study of image classification using scribble attention maps. In extended abstracts of the 2021 CHI conference ...

  139. [153]

    Learning important features through propagating activation differences

    Avanti Shrikumar, Peyton Greenside, and Anshul Kundaje. Learning important features through propagating activation differences. In International conference on machine learning, pages 3145--3153. PMlR, 2017

  140. [154]

    Deep inside convolutional networks: Visualising image classification models and saliency maps, 2014

    Karen Simonyan, Andrea Vedaldi, and Andrew Zisserman. Deep inside convolutional networks: Visualising image classification models and saliency maps, 2014

  141. [155]

    Axiomatic attribution for deep networks

    Mukund Sundararajan, Ankur Taly, and Qiqi Yan. Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. In International conference on machine learning, pages 3319--3328. PMLR, 2017

  142. [156]

    Masktune: Mitigating spurious correlations by forcing to explore, 2022

    Saeid Asgari Taghanaki, Aliasghar Khani, Fereshte Khani, Ali Gholami, Linh Tran, Ali Mahdavi-Amiri, and Ghassan Hamarneh. Masktune: Mitigating spurious correlations by forcing to explore, 2022

  143. [157]

    Learning what makes a difference from counterfactual examples and gradient supervision

    Damien Teney, Ehsan Abbasnedjad, and Anton van den Hengel. Learning what makes a difference from counterfactual examples and gradient supervision. In Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part X 16, pages 580--599....

  144. [158]

    Toward faithful explanatory active learning with self-explainable neural nets

    Stefano Teso. Toward faithful explanatory active learning with self-explainable neural nets. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Interactive Adaptive Learning (IAL 2019), pages 4--16. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2019

  145. [159]

    Explanatory interactive machine learning

    Stefano Teso and Kristian Kersting. Explanatory interactive machine learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pages 239--245, 2019

  146. [160]

    Leveraging explanations in interactive machine learning: An overview

    Stefano Teso, \"O znur Alkan, Wolfgang Stammer, and Elizabeth Daly. Leveraging explanations in interactive machine learning: An overview. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6: 0 1066049, 2023

  147. [161]

    Contrastive multiview coding

    Yonglong Tian, Dilip Krishnan, and Phillip Isola. Contrastive multiview coding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.05849, 2019

  148. [162]

    Pdisconet: Semantically consistent part discovery for fine-grained recognition

    Robert van der Klis, Stephan Alaniz, Massimiliano Mancini, Cassio F Dantas, Dino Ienco, Zeynep Akata, and Diego Marcos. Pdisconet: Semantically consistent part discovery for fine-grained recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, p...

  149. [163]

    Dynamic convolutions: Exploiting spatial sparsity for faster inference

    Thomas Verelst and Tinne Tuytelaars. Dynamic convolutions: Exploiting spatial sparsity for faster inference. In 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, 2020

  150. [164]

    C. Wah, S. Branson, P. Welinder, P. Perona, and S. Belongie. The caltech-ucsd birds-200-2011 dataset. Technical Report CNS-TR-2011-001, California Institute of Technology, 2011

  151. [165]

    Score-cam: Score-weighted visual explanations for convolutional neural networks

    Haofan Wang, Zifan Wang, Mengnan Du, Fan Yang, Zijian Zhang, Sirui Ding, Piotr Mardziel, and Xia Hu. Score-cam: Score-weighted visual explanations for convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops,...

  152. [166]

    Energy-based concept bottleneck models: Unifying prediction, concept intervention, and probabilistic interpretations

    Xinyue Xu, Yi Qin, Lu Mi, Hao Wang, and Xiaomeng Li. Energy-based concept bottleneck models: Unifying prediction, concept intervention, and probabilistic interpretations. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024

  153. [167]

    Improving visual grounding by encouraging consistent gradient-based explanations

    Ziyan Yang, Kushal Kafle, Franck Dernoncourt, and Vicente Ordonez. Improving visual grounding by encouraging consistent gradient-based explanations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 19165--19174, 2023

  154. [168]

    Places: A 10 million image database for scene recognition

    Bolei Zhou, Agata Lapedriza, Aditya Khosla, Aude Oliva, and Antonio Torralba. Places: A 10 million image database for scene recognition. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 40 0 (6): 0 1452--1464, 2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.