Semantically Interpretable Activation Maps: what-where-how explanations within CNNs

A main issue preventing the use of Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) in end user applications is the low level of transparency in the decision process. Previous work on CNN interpretability has mostly focused either on localizing the regions of the image that contribute to the result or on building an external model that generates plausible explanations. However, the former does not provide any semantic information and the latter does not guarantee the faithfulness of the explanation. We propose an intermediate representation composed of multiple Semantically Interpretable Activation Maps (SIAM) indicating the presence of predefined attributes at different locations of the image. These attribute maps are then linearly combined to produce the final output. This gives the user insight into what the model has seen, where, and a final output directly linked to this information in a comprehensive and interpretable way. We test the method on the task of landscape scenicness (aesthetic value) estimation, using an intermediate representation of 33 attributes from the SUN Attributes database. The results confirm that SIAM makes it possible to understand what attributes in the image are contributing to the final score and where they are located. Since it is based on learning from multiple tasks and datasets, SIAM improve the explanability of the prediction without additional annotation efforts or computational overhead at inference time, while keeping good performances on both the final and intermediate tasks.

[1]  Tobias Preis,et al.  Using deep learning to quantify the beauty of outdoor places , 2017, Royal Society Open Science.

[2]  Lalana Kagal,et al.  Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning , 2018, 2018 IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA).

[3]  Bolei Zhou,et al.  Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localization , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[4]  Brian E. Ruttenberg,et al.  Causal Learning and Explanation of Deep Neural Networks via Autoencoded Activations , 2018, ArXiv.

[5]  Wojciech Samek,et al.  Methods for interpreting and understanding deep neural networks , 2017, Digit. Signal Process..

[6]  Quanshi Zhang,et al.  Interpretable Convolutional Neural Networks , 2017, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[7]  Hui Cheng,et al.  Multimedia event recounting with concept based representation , 2012, ACM Multimedia.

[8]  Cordelia Schmid,et al.  Joint Learning of Object and Action Detectors , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[9]  Arvind Satyanarayan,et al.  The Building Blocks of Interpretability , 2018 .

[10]  Huimin Ma,et al.  Single Image Action Recognition Using Semantic Body Part Actions , 2016, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[11]  Rob Fergus,et al.  Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networks , 2013, ECCV.

[12]  Bolei Zhou,et al.  Network Dissection: Quantifying Interpretability of Deep Visual Representations , 2017, 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[13]  Trevor Darrell,et al.  Generating Visual Explanations , 2016, ECCV.

[14]  Bolei Zhou,et al.  Interpretable Basis Decomposition for Visual Explanation , 2018, ECCV.

[15]  Carlos Guestrin,et al.  "Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier , 2016, ArXiv.

[16]  Kate Saenko,et al.  RISE: Randomized Input Sampling for Explanation of Black-box Models , 2018, BMVC.

[17]  Bernease Herman,et al.  The Promise and Peril of Human Evaluation for Model Interpretability , 2017, ArXiv.

[18]  Scott Workman,et al.  Understanding and Mapping Natural Beauty , 2016, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[19]  Davide Modolo,et al.  Do Semantic Parts Emerge in Convolutional Neural Networks? , 2016, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[20]  Bernard Ghanem,et al.  On the relationship between visual attributes and convolutional networks , 2015, 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[21]  Ali Farhadi,et al.  Describing objects by their attributes , 2009, 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[22]  Bernt Schiele,et al.  Interpretability Beyond Classification Output: Semantic Bottleneck Networks , 2019, ArXiv.

[23]  Zhuowen Tu,et al.  Image Parsing: Unifying Segmentation, Detection, and Recognition , 2003, Proceedings Ninth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[24]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  GradMask: Reduce Overfitting by Regularizing Saliency , 2019, ArXiv.

[25]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Zero-shot Learning with Semantic Output Codes , 2009, NIPS.

[26]  Frédéric Jurie,et al.  Semantic bottleneck for computer vision tasks , 2018, ACCV.

[27]  Martin Wattenberg,et al.  Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV) , 2017, ICML.

[28]  Yi Liu,et al.  Teaching Compositionality to CNNs , 2017, 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[29]  Christoph H. Lampert,et al.  Attribute-Based Classification for Zero-Shot Visual Object Categorization , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[30]  Chen Xu,et al.  The SUN Attribute Database: Beyond Categories for Deeper Scene Understanding , 2014, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[31]  Trevor Darrell,et al.  Multimodal Explanations: Justifying Decisions and Pointing to the Evidence , 2018, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[32]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Zero-data Learning of New Tasks , 2008, AAAI.

[33]  Trevor Darrell,et al.  Grounding Visual Explanations , 2018, ECCV.

[34]  Jo Yew Tham,et al.  Learning Attribute Representations with Localization for Flexible Fashion Search , 2018, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.