VisFIS: Visual Feature Importance Supervision with Right-for-the-Right-Reason Objectives

June 22, 2022 ยท Entered Twilight ยท ๐Ÿ› Neural Information Processing Systems

๐Ÿ’ค TWILIGHT: Eternal Rest
Repo abandoned since publication

Repo contents: .gitignore, README.md, analysis, components, dataset.py, images, license, main.py, models, opts.py, preprocessing, requirements.txt, scripts, train.py, utils.py

Authors Zhuofan Ying, Peter Hase, Mohit Bansal arXiv ID 2206.11212 Category cs.CV: Computer Vision Cross-listed cs.AI, cs.CL, cs.LG Citations 15 Venue Neural Information Processing Systems Repository https://github.com/zfying/visfis โญ 5 Last Checked 1 month ago
Abstract
Many past works aim to improve visual reasoning in models by supervising feature importance (estimated by model explanation techniques) with human annotations such as highlights of important image regions. However, recent work has shown that performance gains from feature importance (FI) supervision for Visual Question Answering (VQA) tasks persist even with random supervision, suggesting that these methods do not meaningfully align model FI with human FI. In this paper, we show that model FI supervision can meaningfully improve VQA model accuracy as well as performance on several Right-for-the-Right-Reason (RRR) metrics by optimizing for four key model objectives: (1) accurate predictions given limited but sufficient information (Sufficiency); (2) max-entropy predictions given no important information (Uncertainty); (3) invariance of predictions to changes in unimportant features (Invariance); and (4) alignment between model FI explanations and human FI explanations (Plausibility). Our best performing method, Visual Feature Importance Supervision (VisFIS), outperforms strong baselines on benchmark VQA datasets in terms of both in-distribution and out-of-distribution accuracy. While past work suggests that the mechanism for improved accuracy is through improved explanation plausibility, we show that this relationship depends crucially on explanation faithfulness (whether explanations truly represent the model's internal reasoning). Predictions are more accurate when explanations are plausible and faithful, and not when they are plausible but not faithful. Lastly, we show that, surprisingly, RRR metrics are not predictive of out-of-distribution model accuracy when controlling for a model's in-distribution accuracy, which calls into question the value of these metrics for evaluating model reasoning. All supporting code is available at https://github.com/zfying/visfis
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Computer Vision