Saliency Map Evaluation

Interpreting the decision-making process of deep convolutional neural networks remains a central challenge in achieving trustworthy and transparent artificial intelligence. Explainable AI (XAI) techniques, particularly Class Activation Map (CAM) methods, are widely adopted to visualize the input regions influencing model predictions. Gradient-based approaches (e.g. Grad-CAM) provide highly discriminative, fine-grained details by computing gradients of class activations but often yield noisy and incomplete maps that emphasize only the most salient regions rather than the complete objects. Region-based approaches (e.g. Score-CAM) aggregate information over larger areas, capturing broader object coverage at the cost of over-smoothing and reduced sensitivity to subtle features. We introduce Fusion-CAM, a novel framework that bridges this explanatory gap by unifying both paradigms through a dedicated fusion mechanism to produce robust and highly discriminative visual explanations. Our method first denoises gradient-based maps, yielding cleaner and more focused activations. It then combines the refined gradient map with region-based maps using contribution weights to enhance class coverage. Finally, we propose an adaptive similarity-based pixel-level fusion that evaluates the agreement between both paradigms and dynamically adjusts the fusion strength. This adaptive mechanism reinforces consistent activations while softly blending conflicting regions, resulting in richer, context-aware, and input-adaptive visual explanations. Extensive experiments on standard benchmarks show that Fusion-CAM consistently outperforms existing CAM variants in both qualitative visualization and quantitative evaluation, providing a robust and flexible tool for interpreting deep neural networks.

We introduce a gradient-free framework for identifying minimal, sufficient, and decision-preserving explanations in vision models by isolating the smallest subset of representational units whose joint activation preserves predictions. Unlike existing approaches that aggregate all units, often leading to cluttered saliency maps, our approach, DD-CAM, identifies a 1-minimal subset whose joint activation suffices to preserve the prediction (i.e., removing any unit from the subset alters the prediction). To efficiently isolate minimal sufficient subsets, we adapt delta debugging, a systematic reduction strategy from software debugging, and configure its search strategy based on unit interactions in the classifier head: testing individual units for models with non-interacting units and testing unit combinations for models in which unit interactions exist. We then generate minimal, prediction-preserving saliency maps that highlight only the most essential features. Our experimental evaluation demonstrates that our approach can produce more faithful explanations and achieve higher localization accuracy than the state-of-the-art CAM-based approaches.

State-of-the-art attribution methods such as AttEXplore rely on adversarial sample generation that applies an all-pass filter across the frequency spectrum: they perturb all frequencies of the input image alike, from the low frequencies that carry coarse shape to the high frequencies that carry edges and textures. However, models rely on low and high frequencies to different degrees, and such an all-pass perturbation cannot adapt to the model being explained, which limits the faithfulness of the resulting attribution maps. We propose FAMPE (Frequency-Aware Model Parameter Explorer), an attribution method that overcomes this limitation by perturbing the low- and high-frequency bands of the input independently, so that the perturbation can be shifted toward the band that matters for the model. The boundary between the two bands is set for each image automatically from its spectral energy. On ImageNet with five convolutional neural network and Vision Transformer architectures, FAMPE significantly improves the Insertion Score over the strongest baseline, AttEXplore, on four of them, by up to 15.4%, at essentially the same computational cost. How the perturbed frequency bands are weighted matters: the best and the worst balance between them differ by 19-36% in Insertion Score, and the best balance depends on the architecture. Choosing the balance for each image with a probe that needs no ground truth raises the Insertion Score significantly further on all five architectures, reaching up to 24.4% above AttEXplore. Controlling which frequency band is perturbed is therefore a simple, low-cost way to improve attribution faithfulness.

The evaluation of explainable AI (XAI) approaches often relies on three families of methods: subjective measures (e.g., questionnaires on trust or satisfaction), objective measures (e.g., task performance metrics), and mathematical metrics (e.g., for faithfulness). Yet, it remains unclear how these families align or diverge in practice. In a{preregistered} between-subjects study (N=166), we use three established saliency map techniques (LIME, Grad-CAM, Guided Backpropagation) as a testbed to examine this issue. We find that each family of methods leads to different conclusions: participants reported no differences in trust or satisfaction, Grad-CAM improved user performance, while mathematical metrics favored Guided Backpropagation. At the same time, mathematical metrics were only partially related to user performance, and these relationships were sometimes counterintuitive. Our findings highlight the methodological importance of comparing subjective, objective, and mathematical approaches when evaluating XAI, illustrating both tensions and aspects that are aligned. We discuss implications for XAI evaluation frameworks.