Deliberative Explanations: visualizing network insecurities

Authors: Pei Wang, Nuno Nvasconcelos

NeurIPS 2019 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Experimental In this section we discuss experiments performed to evaluate the quality of deliberative explanations.
Researcher Affiliation Academia Pei Wang and Nuno Vasconcelos Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of California, San Diego {pew062, nvasconcelos}@ucsd.edu
Pseudocode No The paper does not include explicit pseudocode or algorithm blocks.
Open Source Code No The paper does not provide a link to open-source code or explicitly state that the code for the methodology is available.
Open Datasets Yes Experiments were performed on the CUB200 [48] and ADE20K [53] datasets.
Dataset Splits Yes We assume a training set D of N i.i.d. samples D = {(xi, yi)}N i=1, where yi is the label of image xi, and a test set T = {(xj, yj)}M j=1. Test set labels are only used to evaluate performance. ... All results are presented on the standard CUB200 test set and the official validation set of ADE20K.
Hardware Specification No The paper mentions network architectures (VGG16, ResNet50, AlexNet) but provides no specific details about the hardware (GPU, CPU models, memory) used for experiments.
Software Dependencies No The paper does not list specific software dependencies with version numbers (e.g., Python, PyTorch, TensorFlow versions).
Experiment Setup Yes All experiments used candidate class sets C(i, j) of 3 members and among top 5 predictions, and were ran three times. ... For each image, T is chosen so that insecurities cover from 1% to 90% of the image, with steps of 1%.