MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414265080 · doi:10.1117/12.3063619

MCMC-LIME: enhancing stability of LIME using Markov chain Monte Carlo approach

2025· article· en· W4414265080 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Keerthi Devireddy, Shan Suthaharan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMarkov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkov chain Monte CarloRobustness (evolution)SegmentationMonte Carlo methodMerge (version control)Markov chainStability (learning theory)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper deeply investigates the stability issues of the visual explainability technique, called the local interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME)1 and presents an enhanced technique and our findings. Explainability is one of the important tasks in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) systems where LIME tool has been widely used as an explainer model. However, LIME’s perturbation-based sampling introduces randomness, negatively affecting the stability of LIME’s explanations. In this paper, we utilize the unique sampling mechanism of the well-known Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) model to address this issue. However, a question arises: Will MCMC alone provide a semantically meaningful segmentation for visual explainability? To ensure this, we modify 40% of perturbation using MCMC while preserving 60% of the original perturbation of LIME and introduce additional stability-enhancing mechanisms. Adaptive Segment Merge (ASM) is employed to refine segmentation boundaries before applying MCMC, ensuring that segments align with meaningful visual structures. Additionally, Sign Entropy-Based Feature Elimination (SEFE) suppresses the effects of the remaining unstable segments by filtering them based on their sign entropy, further improving the robustness of the explanations. To evaluate the performance of the proposed technique, we adopt the average rank similarity (ARS), which quantifies the consistency of feature rankings across multiple runs. Our simulations, conducted on images of five dog breeds (Samoyed, Pomeranian, Newfoundland, Pug, and Cocker Spaniel) along with a Coyote, and a Robin image, demonstrate that MCMC-LIME achieves ARS scores of 0.893, 0.887, 0.851, 0.874, 0.906, 0.850, and 0.903 compared to 0.803, 0.862, 0.596, 0.676, 0.718, 0.771, and 0.846 for LIME. These results indicate that MCMC-LIME significantly enhances the stability and reliability of visual explanations, making it a more robust alternative to the original LIME.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarkov Chains and Monte Carlo MethodsFrench-language works237,207