LINe: Out-of-Distribution Detection by Leveraging Important Neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is important to quantify the uncertainty of input samples, especially in mission-critical domains such as autonomous driving and healthcare, where failure predictions on out-of-distribution (OOD) data are likely to cause big problems. OOD detection problem fundamentally begins in that the model cannot express what it is not aware of. Post-hoc OOD detection approaches are widely explored because they do not require an additional re-training process which might degrade the model's performance and increase the training cost. In this study, from the perspective of neurons in the deep layer of the model representing high-level features, we introduce a new aspect for analyzing the difference in model outputs between in-distribution data and OOD data. We propose a novel method, Leveraging Important Neurons (LINe), for post-hoc Out of distribution detection. Shapley value-based pruning reduces the effects of noisy outputs by selecting only high-contribution neurons for predicting specific classes of input data and masking the rest. Activation clipping fixes all values above a certain threshold into the same value, allowing LINe to treat all the class-specific features equally and just consider the difference between the number of activated feature differences between in-distribution and OOD data. Comprehensive experiments verify the effectiveness of the proposed method by outperforming state-of-the-art post-hoc OOD detection methods on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and ImageNet datasets. Code is available on https://github.com/LINe-OOD
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".