HackerPapers

arXiv:2003.08907cs.LG

Overinterpretation reveals image classification model pathologies

Brandon Carter, Siddhartha Jain, Jonas Mueller, David Gifford

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Image classifiers are typically scored on their test set accuracy, but high accuracy can mask a subtle type of model failure. We find that high scoring convolutional neural networks (CNNs) on popular benchmarks exhibit troubling pathologies that allow them to display high accuracy even in the absence of semantically salient features. When a model provides a high-confidence decision without salient supporting input features, we say the classifier has overinterpreted its input, finding too much class-evidence in patterns that appear nonsensical to humans. Here, we demonstrate that neural networks trained on CIFAR-10 and ImageNet suffer from overinterpretation, and we find models on CIFAR-10 make confident predictions even when 95% of input images are masked and humans cannot discern salient features in the remaining pixel-subsets. We introduce Batched Gradient SIS, a new method for discovering sufficient input subsets for complex datasets, and use this method to show the sufficiency of border pixels in ImageNet for training and testing. Although these patterns portend potential model fragility in real-world deployment, they are in fact valid statistical patterns of the benchmark that alone suffice to attain high test accuracy. Unlike adversarial examples, overinterpretation relies upon unmodified image pixels. We find ensembling and input dropout can each help mitigate overinterpretation.

arXiv comments
NeurIPS 2021
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.LGMachine Learning cs.CVComputer Vision and Pattern Recognition stat.MLMachine Learning (Statistics)

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Jan 2022 to Jan 2022. Found in 1 HN submission from Jan 2022 to Jan 2022. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • I appreciate that you're saying something that you think is only common sense, but I suspect that is most likely because 99% of the machine learning papers you've seen do nothing else but claim a new SOTA result on some set of benchmarks. Yet just because that's what (almost)…

      YeGoblynQueenneView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.