Where Does Trust Break Down? A Quantitative Trust Analysis of Deep Neural Networks via Trust Matrix and Conditional Trust Densities

Authors: Andrew Hryniowski, Xiao Yu Wang, Alexander Wong

5 pages

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2009.14701v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
The summary is not ready yet

Abstract: The advances and successes in deep learning in recent years have led to considerable efforts and investments into its widespread ubiquitous adoption for a wide variety of applications, ranging from personal assistants and intelligent navigation to search and product recommendation in e-commerce. With this tremendous rise in deep learning adoption comes questions about the trustworthiness of the deep neural networks that power these applications. Motivated to answer such questions, there has been a very recent interest in trust quantification. In this work, we introduce the concept of trust matrix, a novel trust quantification strategy that leverages the recently introduced question-answer trust metric by Wong et al. to provide deeper, more detailed insights into where trust breaks down for a given deep neural network given a set of questions. More specifically, a trust matrix defines the expected question-answer trust for a given actor-oracle answer scenario, allowing one to quickly spot areas of low trust that needs to be addressed to improve the trustworthiness of a deep neural network. The proposed trust matrix is simple to calculate, humanly interpretable, and to the best of the authors' knowledge is the first to study trust at the actor-oracle answer level. We further extend the concept of trust densities with the notion of conditional trust densities. We experimentally leverage trust matrices to study several well-known deep neural network architectures for image recognition, and further study the trust density and conditional trust densities for an interesting actor-oracle answer scenario. The results illustrate that trust matrices, along with conditional trust densities, can be useful tools in addition to the existing suite of trust quantification metrics for guiding practitioners and regulators in creating and certifying deep learning solutions for trusted operation.

Submitted to arXiv on 30 Sep. 2020

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.