Leander Weber

Leander Weber, Jim Berend, Moritz Weckbecker et al.

Gradient-based optimization has been a cornerstone of machine learning that enabled the vast advances of Artificial Intelligence (AI) development over the past decades. However, this type of optimization requires differentiation, and with recent evidence of the benefits of non-differentiable (e.g. neuromorphic) architectures over classical models w.r.t. efficiency, such constraints can become limiting in the future. We present Layer-wise Feedback Propagation (LFP), a novel training principle for neural network-like predictors that utilizes methods from the domain of explainability to decompose a reward to individual neurons based on their respective contributions. Leveraging these neuron-wise rewards, our method then implements a greedy approach reinforcing helpful parts of the network and weakening harmful ones. While having comparable computational complexity to gradient descent, LFP does not require gradient computation and generates sparse and thereby memory- and energy-efficient parameter updates and models. We establish the convergence of LFP theoretically and empirically, demonstrating its effectiveness on various models and datasets. Via two applications - neural network pruning and the approximation-free training of Spiking Neural Networks (SNNs) - we demonstrate that LFP combines increased efficiency in terms of computation and representation with flexibility w.r.t. choice of model architecture and objective function. Our code is available at https://github.com/leanderweber/layerwise-feedback-propagation.

Leander Weber, Sebastian Lapuschkin, Alexander Binder et al.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is an emerging research field bringing transparency to highly complex and opaque machine learning (ML) models. Despite the development of a multitude of methods to explain the decisions of black-box classifiers in recent years, these tools are seldomly used beyond visualization purposes. Only recently, researchers have started to employ explanations in practice to actually improve models. This paper offers a comprehensive overview over techniques that apply XAI practically for improving various properties of ML models, and systematically categorizes these approaches, comparing their respective strengths and weaknesses. We provide a theoretical perspective on these methods, and show empirically through experiments on toy and realistic settings how explanations can help improve properties such as model generalization ability or reasoning, among others. We further discuss potential caveats and drawbacks of these methods. We conclude that while model improvement based on XAI can have significant beneficial effects even on complex and not easily quantifyable model properties, these methods need to be applied carefully, since their success can vary depending on a multitude of factors, such as the model and dataset used, or the employed explanation method.

Alexander Binder, Leander Weber, Sebastian Lapuschkin et al.

While the evaluation of explanations is an important step towards trustworthy models, it needs to be done carefully, and the employed metrics need to be well-understood. Specifically model randomization testing is often overestimated and regarded as a sole criterion for selecting or discarding certain explanation methods. To address shortcomings of this test, we start by observing an experimental gap in the ranking of explanation methods between randomization-based sanity checks [1] and model output faithfulness measures (e.g. [25]). We identify limitations of model-randomization-based sanity checks for the purpose of evaluating explanations. Firstly, we show that uninformative attribution maps created with zero pixel-wise covariance easily achieve high scores in this type of checks. Secondly, we show that top-down model randomization preserves scales of forward pass activations with high probability. That is, channels with large activations have a high probility to contribute strongly to the output, even after randomization of the network on top of them. Hence, explanations after randomization can only be expected to differ to a certain extent. This explains the observed experimental gap. In summary, these results demonstrate the inadequacy of model-randomization-based sanity checks as a criterion to rank attribution methods.

Sami Ede, Serop Baghdadlian, Leander Weber et al.

The ability to continuously process and retain new information like we do naturally as humans is a feat that is highly sought after when training neural networks. Unfortunately, the traditional optimization algorithms often require large amounts of data available during training time and updates wrt. new data are difficult after the training process has been completed. In fact, when new data or tasks arise, previous progress may be lost as neural networks are prone to catastrophic forgetting. Catastrophic forgetting describes the phenomenon when a neural network completely forgets previous knowledge when given new information. We propose a novel training algorithm called training by explaining in which we leverage Layer-wise Relevance Propagation in order to retain the information a neural network has already learned in previous tasks when training on new data. The method is evaluated on a range of benchmark datasets as well as more complex data. Our method not only successfully retains the knowledge of old tasks within the neural networks but does so more resource-efficiently than other state-of-the-art solutions.

Mohammad Mahdi Mesgari, Jackie Ma, Wojciech Samek et al.

In the evaluation of attribution quality, the quantitative assessment of explanation legibility is particularly difficult, as it is influenced by varying shapes and internal organization of attributions not captured by simple statistics. To address this issue, we introduce Minimum Spanning Tree Compactness (MST-C), a graph-based structural metric that captures higher-order geometric properties of attributions, such as spread and cohesion. These components are combined into a single score that evaluates compactness, favoring attributions with salient points spread across a small area and spatially organized into few but cohesive clusters. We show that MST-C reliably distinguishes between explanation methods, exposes fundamental structural differences between models, and provides a robust, self-contained diagnostic for explanation compactness that complements existing notions of attribution complexity.

Shreyas Gururaj, Lars Grüne, Wojciech Samek et al.

Overfitting is a well-known issue extending even to state-of-the-art (SOTA) Machine Learning (ML) models, resulting in reduced generalization, and a significant train-test performance gap. Mitigation measures include a combination of dropout, data augmentation, weight decay, and other regularization techniques. Among the various data augmentation strategies, occlusion is a prominent technique that typically focuses on randomly masking regions of the input during training. Most of the existing literature emphasizes randomness in selecting and modifying the input features instead of regions that strongly influence model decisions. We propose Relevance-driven Input Dropout (RelDrop), a novel data augmentation method which selectively occludes the most relevant regions of the input, nudging the model to use other important features in the prediction process, thus improving model generalization through informed regularization. We further conduct qualitative and quantitative analyses to study how Relevance-driven Input Dropout (RelDrop) affects model decision-making. Through a series of experiments on benchmark datasets, we demonstrate that our approach improves robustness towards occlusion, results in models utilizing more features within the region of interest, and boosts inference time generalization performance. Our code is available at https://github.com/Shreyas-Gururaj/LRP_Relevance_Dropout.

Anna Hedström, Leander Weber, Dilyara Bareeva et al.

The evaluation of explanation methods is a research topic that has not yet been explored deeply, however, since explainability is supposed to strengthen trust in artificial intelligence, it is necessary to systematically review and compare explanation methods in order to confirm their correctness. Until now, no tool with focus on XAI evaluation exists that exhaustively and speedily allows researchers to evaluate the performance of explanations of neural network predictions. To increase transparency and reproducibility in the field, we therefore built Quantus -- a comprehensive, evaluation toolkit in Python that includes a growing, well-organised collection of evaluation metrics and tutorials for evaluating explainable methods. The toolkit has been thoroughly tested and is available under an open-source license on PyPi (or on https://github.com/understandable-machine-intelligence-lab/Quantus/).

Anna Hedström, Leander Weber, Sebastian Lapuschkin et al.

The Model Parameter Randomisation Test (MPRT) is highly recognised in the eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) community due to its fundamental evaluative criterion: explanations should be sensitive to the parameters of the model they seek to explain. However, recent studies have raised several methodological concerns for the empirical interpretation of MPRT. In response, we propose two modifications to the original test: Smooth MPRT and Efficient MPRT. The former reduces the impact of noise on evaluation outcomes via sampling, while the latter avoids the need for biased similarity measurements by re-interpreting the test through the increase in explanation complexity after full model randomisation. Our experiments show that these modifications enhance the metric reliability, facilitating a more trustworthy deployment of explanation methods.

Anna Hedström, Leander Weber, Sebastian Lapuschkin et al.

The Model Parameter Randomisation Test (MPRT) is widely acknowledged in the eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) community for its well-motivated evaluative principle: that the explanation function should be sensitive to changes in the parameters of the model function. However, recent works have identified several methodological caveats for the empirical interpretation of MPRT. To address these caveats, we introduce two adaptations to the original MPRT -- Smooth MPRT and Efficient MPRT, where the former minimises the impact that noise has on the evaluation results through sampling and the latter circumvents the need for biased similarity measurements by re-interpreting the test through the explanation's rise in complexity, after full parameter randomisation. Our experimental results demonstrate that these proposed variants lead to improved metric reliability, thus enabling a more trustworthy application of XAI methods.

Tobias Labarta, Nhi Hoang, Katharina Weitz et al.

As machine learning systems increasingly inform critical decisions, the need for human-understandable explanations grows. Current evaluations of Explainable AI (XAI) often prioritize technical fidelity over cognitive accessibility which critically affects users, in particular those with visual impairments. We propose CUE, a model for Cognitive Understanding of Explanations, linking explanation properties to cognitive sub-processes: legibility (perception), readability (comprehension), and interpretability (interpretation). In a study (N=455) testing heatmaps with varying colormaps (BWR, Cividis, Coolwarm), we found comparable task performance but lower confidence/effort for visually impaired users. Unlike expected, these gaps were not mitigated and sometimes worsened by accessibility-focused color maps like Cividis. These results challenge assumptions about perceptual optimization and support the need for adaptive XAI interfaces. They also validate CUE by demonstrating that altering explanation legibility affects understandability. We contribute: (1) a formalized cognitive model for explanation understanding, (2) an integrated definition of human-centered explanation properties, and (3) empirical evidence motivating accessible, user-tailored XAI.

Franz Motzkus, Leander Weber, Sebastian Lapuschkin

While rule-based attribution methods have proven useful for providing local explanations for Deep Neural Networks, explaining modern and more varied network architectures yields new challenges in generating trustworthy explanations, since the established rule sets might not be sufficient or applicable to novel network structures. As an elegant solution to the above issue, network canonization has recently been introduced. This procedure leverages the implementation-dependency of rule-based attributions and restructures a model into a functionally identical equivalent of alternative design to which established attribution rules can be applied. However, the idea of canonization and its usefulness have so far only been explored qualitatively. In this work, we quantitatively verify the beneficial effects of network canonization to rule-based attributions on VGG-16 and ResNet18 models with BatchNorm layers and thus extend the current best practices for obtaining reliable neural network explanations.

Frederik Pahde, Maximilian Dreyer, Leander Weber et al.

With a growing interest in understanding neural network prediction strategies, Concept Activation Vectors (CAVs) have emerged as a popular tool for modeling human-understandable concepts in the latent space. Commonly, CAVs are computed by leveraging linear classifiers optimizing the separability of latent representations of samples with and without a given concept. However, in this paper we show that such a separability-oriented computation leads to solutions, which may diverge from the actual goal of precisely modeling the concept direction. This discrepancy can be attributed to the significant influence of distractor directions, i.e., signals unrelated to the concept, which are picked up by filters (i.e., weights) of linear models to optimize class-separability. To address this, we introduce pattern-based CAVs, solely focussing on concept signals, thereby providing more accurate concept directions. We evaluate various CAV methods in terms of their alignment with the true concept direction and their impact on CAV applications, including concept sensitivity testing and model correction for shortcut behavior caused by data artifacts. We demonstrate the benefits of pattern-based CAVs using the Pediatric Bone Age, ISIC2019, and FunnyBirds datasets with VGG, ResNet, ReXNet, EfficientNet, and Vision Transformer as model architectures.

Gary S. W. Goh, Sebastian Lapuschkin, Leander Weber et al.

Integrated Gradients as an attribution method for deep neural network models offers simple implementability. However, it suffers from noisiness of explanations which affects the ease of interpretability. The SmoothGrad technique is proposed to solve the noisiness issue and smoothen the attribution maps of any gradient-based attribution method. In this paper, we present SmoothTaylor as a novel theoretical concept bridging Integrated Gradients and SmoothGrad, from the Taylor's theorem perspective. We apply the methods to the image classification problem, using the ILSVRC2012 ImageNet object recognition dataset, and a couple of pretrained image models to generate attribution maps. These attribution maps are empirically evaluated using quantitative measures for sensitivity and noise level. We further propose adaptive noising to optimize for the noise scale hyperparameter value. From our experiments, we find that the SmoothTaylor approach together with adaptive noising is able to generate better quality saliency maps with lesser noise and higher sensitivity to the relevant points in the input space as compared to Integrated Gradients.

Christopher J. Anders, Leander Weber, David Neumann et al.

Contemporary learning models for computer vision are typically trained on very large (benchmark) datasets with millions of samples. These may, however, contain biases, artifacts, or errors that have gone unnoticed and are exploitable by the model. In the worst case, the trained model does not learn a valid and generalizable strategy to solve the problem it was trained for, and becomes a 'Clever-Hans' (CH) predictor that bases its decisions on spurious correlations in the training data, potentially yielding an unrepresentative or unfair, and possibly even hazardous predictor. In this paper, we contribute by providing a comprehensive analysis framework based on a scalable statistical analysis of attributions from explanation methods for large data corpora. Based on a recent technique - Spectral Relevance Analysis - we propose the following technical contributions and resulting findings: (a) a scalable quantification of artifactual and poisoned classes where the machine learning models under study exhibit CH behavior, (b) several approaches denoted as Class Artifact Compensation (ClArC), which are able to effectively and significantly reduce a model's CH behavior. I.e., we are able to un-Hans models trained on (poisoned) datasets, such as the popular ImageNet data corpus. We demonstrate that ClArC, defined in a simple theoretical framework, may be implemented as part of a Neural Network's training or fine-tuning process, or in a post-hoc manner by injecting additional layers, preventing any further propagation of undesired CH features, into the network architecture. Using our proposed methods, we provide qualitative and quantitative analyses of the biases and artifacts in various datasets. We demonstrate that these insights can give rise to improved, more representative and fairer models operating on implicitly cleaned data corpora.