Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Learning to Intervene on Concept Bottlenecks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2308.13453 v3 pith:UF7BKDDX submitted 2023-08-25 cs.LG cs.AI

classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords interventionsconceptcb2msmodelbottleneckmemorymodelscb2m
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

While deep learning models often lack interpretability, concept bottleneck models (CBMs) provide inherent explanations via their concept representations. Moreover, they allow users to perform interventional interactions on these concepts by updating the concept values and thus correcting the predictive output of the model. Up to this point, these interventions were typically applied to the model just once and then discarded. To rectify this, we present concept bottleneck memory models (CB2Ms), which keep a memory of past interventions. Specifically, CB2Ms leverage a two-fold memory to generalize interventions to appropriate novel situations, enabling the model to identify errors and reapply previous interventions. This way, a CB2M learns to automatically improve model performance from a few initially obtained interventions. If no prior human interventions are available, a CB2M can detect potential mistakes of the CBM bottleneck and request targeted interventions. Our experimental evaluations on challenging scenarios like handling distribution shifts and confounded data demonstrate that CB2Ms are able to successfully generalize interventions to unseen data and can indeed identify wrongly inferred concepts. Hence, CB2Ms are a valuable tool for users to provide interactive feedback on CBMs, by guiding a user's interaction and requiring fewer interventions.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Comprehensive Survey on the Risks and Limitations of Concept-based Models

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey cataloging the main vulnerabilities of supervised and unsupervised concept-based models, including concept leakage, spurious correlations, and intervention failures.

Pith tools