REVIEW 2 cited by
Aggregating explanation methods for stable and robust explainability
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
Despite a growing literature on explaining neural networks, no consensus has been reached on how to explain a neural network decision or how to evaluate an explanation. Our contributions in this paper are twofold. First, we investigate schemes to combine explanation methods and reduce model uncertainty to obtain a single aggregated explanation. We provide evidence that the aggregation is better at identifying important features, than on individual methods. Adversarial attacks on explanations is a recent active research topic. As our second contribution, we present evidence that aggregate explanations are much more robust to attacks than individual explanation methods.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Multi-criteria Rank-based Aggregation for Explainable AI
A multi-criteria rank-based aggregation method that combines LIME, SHAP, and ANCHOR explanations, weighted by new rank-based complexity, faithfulness, and stability metrics, is proposed and tested on five datasets.
-
Aggregating Local Saliency Maps for Semi-Global Explainable Image Classification
SATs aggregate local saliency maps over semantic segments to produce semi-global rankings of feature influence, exposing shortcut reliance even when out-of-distribution accuracy barely changes.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.