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

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 24 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Explanations can be manipulated and geometry is to blame

Open access

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.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1906.07983

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [6][6] Ramprasaath R. Selvaraju, Abhishek Das, Ramakrishna Vedantam, Michael Cogswell, Devi Parikh, and Dhruv Batra. Grad-cam: Why did you say that? visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. CoRR , abs/1610.02391, 2016. - · arXiv
  2. [14][14] Avanti Shrikumar, Peyton Greenside, and Anshul Kundaje. Learning important features through propagating activation differences. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2017, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 6-11 August 2017 , pages 3145-3153, 2017. -
  3. [15][15] Ruth C Fong and Andrea Vedaldi. Interpretable explanations of black boxes by meaningful perturbation. In 2017 IEEE international conference on computer vision (ICCV) , pages 3449-3457. IEEE, 2017. -
  4. [22][22] Julius Adebayo, Justin Gilmer, Michael Muelly, Ian J. Goodfellow, Moritz Hardt, and Been Kim. Sanity checks for saliency maps. CoRR , abs/1810.03292, 2018. - · arXiv
  5. [23][23] Maximilian Alber, Sebastian Lapuschkin, Philipp Seegerer, Miriam Hägele, Kristof T. Schütt, Grégoire Montavon, Wojciech Samek, Klaus-Robert Müller, Sven Dähne, and Pieter-Jan Kindermans. innvestigate neural networks! Journal of Machine Learning Research 20 , 2019. -
  6. [29][29] Gao Huang, Zhuang Liu, and Kilian Q. Weinberger. Densely connected convolutional networks. CoRR , abs/1608.06993, 2016. - · arXiv
  7. [31][31] Loring W Tu. Differential geometry: connections, curvature, and characteristic classes , volume 275. Springer, 2017.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–206 of 206

Metadata

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