Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Interpreting Deep Learning: The Machine Learning Rorschach Test?

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 1806.00148 v1 pith:Q6F6RXBY submitted 2018-06-01 stat.ML cs.LG

classification stat.MLcs.LG
keywords learningdnnsmachinedeeptesttheoryunderstandinganalysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Theoretical understanding of deep learning is one of the most important tasks facing the statistics and machine learning communities. While deep neural networks (DNNs) originated as engineering methods and models of biological networks in neuroscience and psychology, they have quickly become a centerpiece of the machine learning toolbox. Unfortunately, DNN adoption powered by recent successes combined with the open-source nature of the machine learning community, has outpaced our theoretical understanding. We cannot reliably identify when and why DNNs will make mistakes. In some applications like text translation these mistakes may be comical and provide for fun fodder in research talks, a single error can be very costly in tasks like medical imaging. As we utilize DNNs in increasingly sensitive applications, a better understanding of their properties is thus imperative. Recent advances in DNN theory are numerous and include many different sources of intuition, such as learning theory, sparse signal analysis, physics, chemistry, and psychology. An interesting pattern begins to emerge in the breadth of possible interpretations. The seemingly limitless approaches are mostly constrained by the lens with which the mathematical operations are viewed. Ultimately, the interpretation of DNNs appears to mimic a type of Rorschach test --- a psychological test wherein subjects interpret a series of seemingly ambiguous ink-blots. Validation for DNN theory requires a convergence of the literature. We must distinguish between universal results that are invariant to the analysis perspective and those that are specific to a particular network configuration. Simultaneously we must deal with the fact that many standard statistical tools for quantifying generalization or empirically assessing important network features are difficult to apply to DNNs.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Neural Architecture Search by Estimation of Network Structure Distributions

    cs.NE 2019-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ASED uses an estimation-of-distribution algorithm to search over a probability matrix of layer types, discovering non-regular CNN architectures for USPS and CIFAR-100.

Pith tools