Supporting DNN Safety Analysis and Retraining through Heatmap-based Unsupervised Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This repository provides the data used for the experiments of the paper "Supporting DNN Safety Analysis and Retraining through Heatmap-based Unsupervised Learning" by Hazem Fahmy, Fabrizio Pastore, Mojtaba Bagherzadeh, and Lionel Briand appearing in IEEE Transactions on Reliability (doi: 10.1109/TR.2021.3074750) 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 underrepresented in the test set may lead to serious safety violation risks, but may, however, remain unnoticed; (2) char- acterizing 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 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.008 |
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".