Supporting Deep Neural Network Safety Analysis and Retraining Through Heatmap-Based Unsupervised Learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it