Source author record

Oana-Iuliana Popescu

Oana-Iuliana Popescu appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Do Users Benefit From Interpretable Vision? A User Study, Baseline, And Dataset

A variety of methods exist to explain image classification models. However, whether they provide any benefit to users over simply comparing various inputs and the model's respective predictions remains unclear. We conducted a user study (N=240) to test how such a baseline explanation technique performs against concept-based and counterfactual explanations. To this end, we contribute a synthetic dataset generator capable of biasing individual attributes and quantifying their relevance to the model. In a study, we assess if participants can identify the relevant set of attributes compared to the ground-truth. Our results show that the baseline outperformed concept-based explanations. Counterfactual explanations from an invertible neural network performed similarly as the baseline. Still, they allowed users to identify some attributes more accurately. Our results highlight the importance of measuring how well users can reason about biases of a model, rather than solely relying on technical evaluations or proxy tasks. We open-source our study and dataset so it can serve as a blue-print for future studies. For code see, https://github.com/berleon/do_users_benefit_from_interpretable_vision

preprint2021arXiv

Counterfactual Generation with Knockoffs

Human interpretability of deep neural networks' decisions is crucial, especially in domains where these directly affect human lives. Counterfactual explanations of already trained neural networks can be generated by perturbing input features and attributing importance according to the change in the classifier's outcome after perturbation. Perturbation can be done by replacing features using heuristic or generative in-filling methods. The choice of in-filling function significantly impacts the number of artifacts, i.e., false-positive attributions. Heuristic methods result in false-positive artifacts because the image after the perturbation is far from the original data distribution. Generative in-filling methods reduce artifacts by producing in-filling values that respect the original data distribution. However, current generative in-filling methods may also increase false-negatives due to the high correlation of in-filling values with the original data. In this paper, we propose to alleviate this by generating in-fillings with the statistically-grounded Knockoffs framework, which was developed by Barber and Candès in 2015 as a tool for variable selection with controllable false discovery rate. Knockoffs are statistically null-variables as decorrelated as possible from the original data, which can be swapped with the originals without changing the underlying data distribution. A comparison of different in-filling methods indicates that in-filling with knockoffs can reveal explanations in a more causal sense while still maintaining the compactness of the explanations.