Cited by 1,164Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Evaluating the Visualization of What a Deep Neural Network Has Learned

Samek, Wojciech, Binder, Alexander, Montavon, Gregoire, Lapuschkin, Sebastian, Muller, Klaus-Robert·2017·IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems

Abstract

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have demonstrated impressive performance in complex machine learning tasks such as image classification or speech recognition. However, due to their multilayer nonlinear structure, they are not transparent, i.e., it is hard to grasp what makes them arrive at a particular classification or recognition decision, given a new unseen data sample. Recently, several approaches have been proposed enabling one to understand and interpret the reasoning embodied in a DNN for a single test image. These methods quantify the “importance” of individual pixels with respect to the classification decision and allow a visualization in terms of a heatmap in pixel/input space. While the usefulness of heatmaps can be judged subjectively by a human, an objective quality measure is missing. In this paper, we present a general methodology based on region perturbation for evaluating ordered collections of pixels such as heatmaps. We compare heatmaps computed by three different methods on the SUN397, ILSVRC2012, and MIT Places data sets. Our main result is that the recently proposed layer-wise relevance propagation algorithm qualitatively and quantitatively provides a better explanation of what made a DNN arrive at a particular classification decision than the sensitivity-based approach or the deconvolution method. We provide theoretical arguments to explain this result and discuss its practical implications. Finally, we investigate the use of heatmaps for unsupervised assessment of the neural network performance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tnnls.2016.2599820

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Samek, W., Binder, A., Montavon, G., Lapuschkin, S., & Muller, K.-R.
Affiliations
  • Fraunhofer Institute for Telecommunications, Heinrich Hertz Institute (DE)
  • Singapore University of Technology and Design (SG)
  • Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems
Published
2017-11
Volume
28
Issue
11
Pages
2660-2673
ISSN
  • 2162-237X (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-2388
OpenAlex
W2240067561
Cited by
1,164
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 120 · 2025: 105 · 2024: 139 · 2023: 163 · 2022: 147 · 2021: 171 · 2020: 123 · 2019: 92 · 2018: 66 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 1
FWCI
53.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Publikationsdatenbank der Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft) (submittedVersion)
  • Fraunhofer-Publica (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Brain Korea 21 Plus Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea Funded by the Ministry of Education
  • DFG (MU 987/17-1)
  • German Ministry for Education and Research as Berlin Big Data Center (01IS14013A)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
deep neural network interpretability, layer-wise relevance propagation, deconvolution, explainable AI, image classification

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review