REVIEW
Why Uncertainty Calibration Matters for Reliable Perturbation-based 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
Why Uncertainty Calibration Matters for Reliable Perturbation-based Explanations
read the original abstract
Perturbation-based explanations are widely utilized to enhance the transparency of modern machine-learning models. However, their reliability is often compromised by the unknown model behavior under the specific perturbations used. This paper investigates the relationship between uncertainty calibration - the alignment of model confidence with actual accuracy - and perturbation-based explanations. We show that models frequently produce unreliable probability estimates when subjected to explainability-specific perturbations and theoretically prove that this directly undermines explanation quality. To address this, we introduce ReCalX, a novel approach to recalibrate models for improved perturbation-based explanations while preserving their original predictions. Experiments on popular computer vision models demonstrate that our calibration strategy produces explanations that are more aligned with human perception and actual object locations.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.