Learning Concept Bottleneck Models from Mechanistic Explanations

Concept bottleneck models (CBMs) are neural classifiers that allow to explain their decisions via high-level concepts, potentially enabling understanding, steering and debugging. However, their explanations are often derived heuristically. Building on formal explainability, we argue they should also be faithful, i.e., not misreport which concepts actually matter. We show that, for widespread CBM architectures, including recent VLM-based variants, faithful explanations must include all concepts in the bottleneck, compromising interpretability when this is large. This result applies to both heuristic and faithful-by-construction formal explanations. To encourage the existence of compact faithful explanations, we suggest i) modeling concepts probabilistically as binary or categorical random variables (rather than logits), and ii) employing per-concept training-time sparsification via group lasso (rather than regular elastic net). We also extend algorithms from formal explainability to CBMs, and show they outperform natural heuristics in terms of guarantees and explanation size. Overall, our work warns against naive interpretability claims and provides formal conditions and practical strategies for ensuring CBMs are as interpretable as advertised.

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) provide interpretability by routing predictions through a layer of human-understandable concepts. However, defining an optimal concept set for a specific dataset remains an open challenge. Existing approaches rely on expensive expert annotations or LLM-generated lists based solely on class names. Even "open-vocabulary" variants typically depend on static concept sets, which restrict discovery and introduce label bias. Furthermore, traditional CBMs often suffer from information leakage, where unmodeled visual features bypass the bottleneck and compromise the integrity of the explanations. To overcome these limitations, we propose Caption Bottleneck Models (CaBM), a framework that circumvents the need for predefined concept sets by replacing rigid concept layers with free-form natural language. By representing images via LMM-generated captions and training a classifier strictly on this text, CaBM ensures a leakage-free architecture by construction. Additionally, by analyzing the text classifier post-training, CaBM autonomously discovers high-quality, dataset-specific concepts. Our results across fine- and coarse-grained benchmarks demonstrate that CaBM achieves competitive accuracy while preserving interpretability without the constraints of external dictionaries or manual labeling.

We propose a novel, flexible, and efficient framework for designing Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) that enables practitioners to explicitly encode and extend their prior knowledge and beliefs about the concept-concept ($C-C$) and concept-task ($C \to Y$) relationships within the model's reasoning when making predictions. The resulting $\textbf{C}$oncept $\textbf{REA}$soning $\textbf{M}$odels (CREAMs) architecturally encode arbitrary types of $C-C$ relationships such as mutual exclusivity, hierarchical associations, and/or correlations, as well as potentially sparse $C \to Y$ relationships. Moreover, CREAM can optionally incorporate a regularized side-channel to complement the potentially {incomplete concept sets}, achieving competitive task performance while encouraging predictions to be concept-grounded. To evaluate CBMs in such settings, we introduce a $C \to Y$ agnostic metric that quantifies interpretability when predictions partially rely on the side-channel. In our experiments, we show that, without additional computational overhead, CREAM models support efficient interventions, can avoid concept leakage, and achieve black-box-level performance under missing concepts. We further analyze how an optional side-channel affects interpretability and intervenability. Importantly, the side-channel enables CBMs to remain effective even in scenarios where only a limited number of concepts are available.