Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2306.06414

Revealing Model Biases: Assessing Deep Neural Networks via Recovered Sample Analysis

Abstract

This paper proposes a straightforward and cost-effective approach to assess whether a deep neural network (DNN) relies on the primary concepts of training samples or simply learns discriminative, yet simple and irrelevant features that can differentiate between classes. The paper highlights that DNNs, as discriminative classifiers, often find the simplest features to discriminate between classes, leading to a potential bias towards irrelevant features and sometimes missing generalization. While a generalization test is one way to evaluate a trained model's performance, it can be costly and may not cover all scenarios to ensure that the model has learned the primary concepts. Furthermore, even after conducting a generalization test, identifying bias in the model may not be possible. Here, the paper proposes a method that involves recovering samples from the parameters of the trained model and analyzing the reconstruction quality. We believe that if the model's weights are optimized to discriminate based on some features, these features will be reflected in the reconstructed samples. If the recovered samples contain the primary concepts of the training data, it can be concluded that the model has learned the essential and determining features. On the other hand, if the recovered samples contain irrelevant features, it can be concluded that the model is biased towards these features. The proposed method does not require any test or generalization samples, only the parameters of the trained model and the training data that lie on the margin. Our experiments demonstrate that the proposed method can determine whether the model has learned the desired features of the training data. The paper highlights that our understanding of how these models work is limited, and the proposed approach addresses this issue.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mohammad Mahdi Mehmanchi, Mahbod Nouri, Mohammad Sabokrou. 2023-06-10. Revealing Model Biases: Assessing Deep Neural Networks via Recovered Sample Analysis. https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.06414

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Privacy Leakage on DNNs: A Survey of Model Inversion Attacks and Defenses

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have revolutionized various domains with their exceptional performance across numerous applications. However, Model Inversion (MI) attacks, which disclose private information about the training dataset by abusing access to the trained models, have emerged as a formidable privacy threat. Given a trained network, these attacks enable adversaries to reconstruct high-fidelity data that closely aligns with the private training samples, posing significant privacy concerns. Despite the rapid advances in the field, we lack a comprehensive and systematic overview of existing MI attacks and defenses. To fill this gap, this paper thoroughly investigates this realm and presents a holistic survey. Firstly, our work briefly reviews early MI studies on traditional machine learning scenarios. We then elaborately analyze and compare numerous recent attacks and defenses on Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) across multiple modalities and learning tasks. By meticulously analyzing their distinctive features, we summarize and classify these methods into different categories and provide a novel taxonomy. Finally, this paper discusses promising research directions and presents potential solutions to open issues. To facilitate further study on MI attacks and defenses, we have implemented an open-source model inversion toolbox on GitHub (https://github.com/ffhibnese/Model-Inversion-Attack-ToolBox).

cs.CV

ALINA: Advanced Line Identification and Notation Algorithm

Labels are the cornerstone of supervised machine learning algorithms. Most visual recognition methods are fully supervised, using bounding boxes or pixel-wise segmentations for object localization. Traditional labeling methods, such as crowd-sourcing, are prohibitive due to cost, data privacy, amount of time, and potential errors on large datasets. To address these issues, we propose a novel annotation framework, Advanced Line Identification and Notation Algorithm (ALINA), which can be used for labeling taxiway datasets that consist of different camera perspectives and variable weather attributes (sunny and cloudy). Additionally, the CIRCular threshoLd pixEl Discovery And Traversal (CIRCLEDAT) algorithm has been proposed, which is an integral step in determining the pixels corresponding to taxiway line markings. Once the pixels are identified, ALINA generates corresponding pixel coordinate annotations on the frame. Using this approach, 60,249 frames from the taxiway dataset, AssistTaxi have been labeled. To evaluate the performance, a context-based edge map (CBEM) set was generated manually based on edge features and connectivity. The detection rate after testing the annotated labels with the CBEM set was recorded as 98.45%, attesting its dependability and effectiveness.

cs.CV

DisasterInsight: A Building-Centric Benchmark for Evaluating Vision--Language Models in Disaster Response

Vision--language models (VLMs) show promise for disaster-response remote sensing, but existing benchmarks mainly emphasize scene-level or damage-centric assessment. To study this building-centric gap, we introduce \method{}, a diagnostic benchmark built on xBD, a pre/post-disaster satellite dataset with building-level damage labels. \method{} enriches building instances with OpenStreetMap-derived functional labels and contains 134{,}108 task-specific instruction records across 15 task types, spanning instance-level assessment, scene-level counting, multi-instance reasoning, and structured report generation. The benchmark supports RGB pre/post-disaster imagery, single- and multi-view instance formulations, and scene-level RGB/SAR diagnostic inputs. Experiments with general-domain and remote-sensing VLMs show that models perform better on visible damage cues than on building-function understanding, multi-instance reasoning, counting, and grounded reporting. Instruction tuning improves performance on several tasks but does not close this building-centric gap.

cs.CV