Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanations

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

arxiv 1901.09392 v4 pith:NOV2ZKBS submitted 2019-01-27 cs.LG stat.ML

classification cs.LGstat.ML
keywords explanationexplanationssensitivitymeasuresfidelityinfidelityoptimalgiven
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We consider objective evaluation measures of saliency explanations for complex black-box machine learning models. We propose simple robust variants of two notions that have been considered in recent literature: (in)fidelity, and sensitivity. We analyze optimal explanations with respect to both these measures, and while the optimal explanation for sensitivity is a vacuous constant explanation, the optimal explanation for infidelity is a novel combination of two popular explanation methods. By varying the perturbation distribution that defines infidelity, we obtain novel explanations by optimizing infidelity, which we show to out-perform existing explanations in both quantitative and qualitative measurements. Another salient question given these measures is how to modify any given explanation to have better values with respect to these measures. We propose a simple modification based on lowering sensitivity, and moreover show that when done appropriately, we could simultaneously improve both sensitivity as well as fidelity.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Interpretable AI for Time-Series: Multi-Model Heatmap Fusion with Global Attention and NLP-Generated Explanations

    cs.LG 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    Fusing Grad-CAM and attention rollout plus an NLP module is presented as an interpretable time-series framework, but the claims are undercut by unsupported theory and dataset errors.

  2. CASE: Contrastive Activation for Saliency Estimation

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    CASE removes gradient components shared with confused classes to produce more class-distinct saliency maps, validated on a top-k overlap diagnostic where many existing methods show class-insensitive behavior.

Pith tools