PreprintCited by 206Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques

Explanations can be manipulated and geometry is to blame

Open access
Dombrowski, Ann-Kathrin, Alber, Maximilian, Anders, Christopher J., Ackermann, Marcel, Müller, Klaus-Robert, Kessel, Pan·2019·arXiv

Abstract

Explanation methods aim to make neural networks more trustworthy and interpretable. In this paper, we demonstrate a property of explanation methods which is disconcerting for both of these purposes. Namely, we show that explanations can be manipulated arbitrarily by applying visually hardly perceptible perturbations to the input that keep the network's output approximately constant. We establish theoretically that this phenomenon can be related to certain geometrical properties of neural networks. This allows us to derive an upper bound on the susceptibility of explanations to manipulations. Based on this result, we propose effective mechanisms to enhance the robustness of explanations.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1906.07983

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dombrowski, A.-K., Alber, M., Anders, C. J., Ackermann, M., Müller, K.-R., & Kessel, P.
Affiliations
Technische Universität Berlin (DE)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2951306478
Cited by
171
References
27
Citations by year
2025: 17 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 5
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
Keywords
explanation methods, neural network interpretability, explanation robustness, input perturbation, explainable AI

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