Deep Convolutional Neuronal Networks (DCNNs) are showing remarkable performance on many computer vision tasks. Due to their large parameter space, they require many labeled samples when trained in a supervised setting. The costs of annotating data manually can render the use of DCNNs infeasible. We present a novel framework called RenderGAN that can generate large amounts of realistic, labeled images by combining a 3D model and the Generative Adversarial Network framework. In our approach, image augmentations (e.g., lighting, background, and detail) are learned from unlabeled data such that the generated images are strikingly realistic while preserving the labels known from the 3D model. We apply the RenderGAN framework to generate images of barcode-like markers that are attached to honeybees. Training a DCNN on data generated by the RenderGAN yields considerably better performance than training it on various baselines.

Attribution methods provide insights into the decision-making of machine learning models like artificial neural networks. For a given input sample, they assign a relevance score to each individual input variable, such as the pixels of an image. In this work, we adopt the information bottleneck concept for attribution. By adding noise to intermediate feature maps, we restrict the flow of information and can quantify (in bits) how much information image regions provide. We compare our method against ten baselines using three different metrics on VGG-16 and ResNet-50, and find that our methods outperform all baselines in five out of six settings. The method's information-theoretic foundation provides an absolute frame of reference for attribution values (bits) and a guarantee that regions scored close to zero are not necessary for the network's decision.

No abstract

Saliency methods attempt to explain deep neural networks by highlighting the most salient features of a sample. Some widely used methods are based on a theoretical framework called Deep Taylor Decomposition (DTD), which formalizes the recursive application of the Taylor Theorem to the network's layers. However, recent work has found these methods to be independent of the network's deeper layers and appear to respond only to lower-level image structure. Here, we investigate the DTD theory to better understand this perplexing behavior and found that the Deep Taylor Decomposition is equivalent to the basic gradientˆinput method when the Taylor root points (an important parameter of the algorithm chosen by the user) are locally constant. If the root points are locally input-dependent, then one can justify any explanation. In this case, the theory is under-constrained. In an empirical evaluation, we find that DTD roots do not lie in the same linear regions as the input -contrary to a fundamental assumption of the Taylor theorem. The theoretical foundations of DTD were cited as a source of reliability for the explanations. However, our findings urge caution in making such claims.

A variety of methods exist to explain image classification models. However, it remains unclear whether they provide any benefit to users over simply comparing various inputs and the model's respective predictions. 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.