HUDD: A tool to debug DNNs for safety analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present HUDD, a tool that supports safety analysis practices for systems enabled by Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) by automatically identifying the root causes for DNN errors and retraining the DNN. HUDD stands for Heatmap-based Unsupervised Debugging of DNNs, it automatically clusters error-inducing images whose results are due to common subsets of DNN neurons. The intent is for the generated clusters to group error-inducing images having common characteristics, that is, having a common root cause.HUDD identifies root causes by applying a clustering algorithm to matrices (i.e., 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. Our empirical evaluation with DNNs from the automotive domain have shown that HUDD automatically identifies 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. A demo video of HUDD is available at https://youtu.be/drjVakP7jdU.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".