MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164255502 · doi:10.1109/tr.2021.3074750

Supporting Deep Neural Network Safety Analysis and Retraining Through Heatmap-Based Unsupervised Learning

2021· article· en· W3164255502 on OpenAlexafffund
Hazem Fahmy, Fabrizio Pastore, Mojtaba Bagherzadeh, Lionel Briand

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Reliability · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceRetrainingContext (archaeology)Deep neural networksArtificial intelligenceCluster analysisMachine learningArtificial neural networkAutomotive industrySet (abstract data type)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep neural networks (DNNs) are increasingly important in safety-critical systems, for example, in their perception layer to analyze images. Unfortunately, there is a lack of methods to ensure the functional safety of DNN-based components. We observe three major challenges with existing practices regarding DNNs in safety-critical systems: 1) Scenarios that are under-represented in the test set may lead to serious safety violation risks but may, however, remain unnoticed; 2) characterizing such high-risk scenarios is critical for safety analysis; 3) retraining DNNs to address these risks is poorly supported when causes of violations are difficult to determine. To address these problems in the context of DNNs analyzing images, we propose heatmap-based unsupervised debugging of DNNs (HUDD), an approach that automatically supports the identification of root causes for DNN errors. HUDD identifies root causes by applying a clustering algorithm to heatmaps capturing the relevance of every DNN neuron on the DNN outcome. Also, HUDD retrains DNNs with images that are automatically selected based on their relatedness to the identified image clusters. We evaluated HUDD with DNNs from the automotive domain. HUDD was able to identify all the distinct root causes of DNN errors, thus supporting safety analysis. Also, our retraining approach has shown to be more effective at improving DNN accuracy than existing approaches.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ReliabilitySame topicAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningFrench-language works237,207