Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Exploring the Rashomon Set for Concept-Based Models

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 2511.19636 v2 pith:DVP7OVDM submitted 2025-11-24 cs.LG cs.AI

Exploring the Rashomon Set for Concept-Based Models

classification cs.LG cs.AI
keywords modelscbmsrashomonaccurateexploringbetterconceptdiversity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

In many machine learning problems, there may exist multiple models that achieve nearly identical predictive performance while relying on fundamentally different internal logic. However, standard training procedures produce a single model, offering no practical way to explore alternatives that may better suit downstream needs. The set of these equally accurate models is known as the Rashomon set. Exploring the Rashomon set is particularly challenging in large and complex hypothesis spaces, such as Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs), which are widely used in computer vision to make predictions through intermediate, human-understandable concepts. In this paper, we provide a method for efficiently exploring the Rashomon set of CBMs. Our framework introduces a specialized parallel adapter-based construction, combined with a checkpointing scheme and a concept diversity objective, to generate multiple equally accurate CBMs from a single training process. Empirical results show that our method finds models with better diversity than baselines while using much less memory. We further demonstrate that access to these diverse yet accurate CBMs enables trustworthy model selection, resolution of inter-class confusion, and reliable abstention in decision-making.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Position: Explainability Research Must Prioritize Foundations over Ad-hoc Methods

    cs.LG 2026-06 conditional novelty 4.0

    Explainable AI research should prioritize definitions, properties, evaluations, and actionability over new ad-hoc methods, on evidence from 617 papers and 34 practitioners.