BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Suraj Srinivas

Suraj Srinivas contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningComputer VisionArtificial Intelligence

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Efficiently Training Low-Curvature Neural Networks

The highly non-linear nature of deep neural networks causes them to be susceptible to adversarial examples and have unstable gradients which hinders interpretability. However, existing methods to solve these issues, such as adversarial training, are expensive and often sacrifice predictive accuracy. In this work, we consider curvature, which is a mathematical quantity which encodes the degree of non-linearity. Using this, we demonstrate low-curvature neural networks (LCNNs) that obtain drastically lower curvature than standard models while exhibiting similar predictive performance, which leads to improved robustness and stable gradients, with only a marginally increased training time. To achieve this, we minimize a data-independent upper bound on the curvature of a neural network, which decomposes overall curvature in terms of curvatures and slopes of its constituent layers. To efficiently minimize this bound, we introduce two novel architectural components: first, a non-linearity called centered-softplus that is a stable variant of the softplus non-linearity, and second, a Lipschitz-constrained batch normalization layer. Our experiments show that LCNNs have lower curvature, more stable gradients and increased off-the-shelf adversarial robustness when compared to their standard high-curvature counterparts, all without affecting predictive performance. Our approach is easy to use and can be readily incorporated into existing neural network models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Cyclical Pruning for Sparse Neural Networks

Current methods for pruning neural network weights iteratively apply magnitude-based pruning on the model weights and re-train the resulting model to recover lost accuracy. In this work, we show that such strategies do not allow for the recovery of erroneously pruned weights. To enable weight recovery, we propose a simple strategy called \textit{cyclical pruning} which requires the pruning schedule to be periodic and allows for weights pruned erroneously in one cycle to recover in subsequent ones. Experimental results on both linear models and large-scale deep neural networks show that cyclical pruning outperforms existing pruning algorithms, especially at high sparsity ratios. Our approach is easy to tune and can be readily incorporated into existing pruning pipelines to boost performance.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Which Explanation Should I Choose? A Function Approximation Perspective to Characterizing Post Hoc Explanations

A critical problem in the field of post hoc explainability is the lack of a common foundational goal among methods. For example, some methods are motivated by function approximation, some by game theoretic notions, and some by obtaining clean visualizations. This fragmentation of goals causes not only an inconsistent conceptual understanding of explanations but also the practical challenge of not knowing which method to use when. In this work, we begin to address these challenges by unifying eight popular post hoc explanation methods (LIME, C-LIME, KernelSHAP, Occlusion, Vanilla Gradients, Gradients x Input, SmoothGrad, and Integrated Gradients). We show that these methods all perform local function approximation of the black-box model, differing only in the neighbourhood and loss function used to perform the approximation. This unification enables us to (1) state a no free lunch theorem for explanation methods, demonstrating that no method can perform optimally across all neighbourhoods, and (2) provide a guiding principle to choose among methods based on faithfulness to the black-box model. We empirically validate these theoretical results using various real-world datasets, model classes, and prediction tasks. By bringing diverse explanation methods into a common framework, this work (1) advances the conceptual understanding of these methods, revealing their shared local function approximation objective, properties, and relation to one another, and (2) guides the use of these methods in practice, providing a principled approach to choose among methods and paving the way for the creation of new ones.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Rethinking the Role of Gradient-Based Attribution Methods for Model Interpretability

Current methods for the interpretability of discriminative deep neural networks commonly rely on the model's input-gradients, i.e., the gradients of the output logits w.r.t. the inputs. The common assumption is that these input-gradients contain information regarding $p_θ ( y \mid x)$, the model's discriminative capabilities, thus justifying their use for interpretability. However, in this work we show that these input-gradients can be arbitrarily manipulated as a consequence of the shift-invariance of softmax without changing the discriminative function. This leaves an open question: if input-gradients can be arbitrary, why are they highly structured and explanatory in standard models? We investigate this by re-interpreting the logits of standard softmax-based classifiers as unnormalized log-densities of the data distribution and show that input-gradients can be viewed as gradients of a class-conditional density model $p_θ(x \mid y)$ implicit within the discriminative model. This leads us to hypothesize that the highly structured and explanatory nature of input-gradients may be due to the alignment of this class-conditional model $p_θ(x \mid y)$ with that of the ground truth data distribution $p_{\text{data}} (x \mid y)$. We test this hypothesis by studying the effect of density alignment on gradient explanations. To achieve this alignment we use score-matching, and propose novel approximations to this algorithm to enable training large-scale models. Our experiments show that improving the alignment of the implicit density model with the data distribution enhances gradient structure and explanatory power while reducing this alignment has the opposite effect. Overall, our finding that input-gradients capture information regarding an implicit generative model implies that we need to re-think their use for interpreting discriminative models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access