VLG-CBM: Training Concept Bottleneck Models with Vision-Language Guidance
About
Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) provide interpretable prediction by introducing an intermediate Concept Bottleneck Layer (CBL), which encodes human-understandable concepts to explain models' decision. Recent works proposed to utilize Large Language Models and pre-trained Vision-Language Models to automate the training of CBMs, making it more scalable and automated. However, existing approaches still fall short in two aspects: First, the concepts predicted by CBL often mismatch the input image, raising doubts about the faithfulness of interpretation. Second, it has been shown that concept values encode unintended information: even a set of random concepts could achieve comparable test accuracy to state-of-the-art CBMs. To address these critical limitations, in this work, we propose a novel framework called Vision-Language-Guided Concept Bottleneck Model (VLG-CBM) to enable faithful interpretability with the benefits of boosted performance. Our method leverages off-the-shelf open-domain grounded object detectors to provide visually grounded concept annotation, which largely enhances the faithfulness of concept prediction while further improving the model performance. In addition, we propose a new metric called Number of Effective Concepts (NEC) to control the information leakage and provide better interpretability. Extensive evaluations across five standard benchmarks show that our method, VLG-CBM, outperforms existing methods by at least 4.27% and up to 51.09% on Accuracy at NEC=5 (denoted as ANEC-5), and by at least 0.45% and up to 29.78% on average accuracy (denoted as ANEC-avg), while preserving both faithfulness and interpretability of the learned concepts as demonstrated in extensive experiments.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image Classification | CIFAR-100 (val) | Accuracy65.73 | 661 | |
| Image Classification | Food-101 | Accuracy92.8 | 494 | |
| Image Classification | Flowers102 | Accuracy97.1 | 478 | |
| Image Classification | Food101 | Accuracy81.6 | 309 | |
| Image Classification | CUB-200-2011 (test) | Top-1 Acc66.03 | 276 | |
| Image Classification | RESISC45 | -- | 263 | |
| Image Classification | CUB-200 2011 | Accuracy84.5 | 257 | |
| Image Classification | Oxford Flowers 102 | -- | 172 | |
| Image Classification | CUB200 (val) | Accuracy60.38 | 66 | |
| Image Classification | CIFAR-10 (test) | Accuracy88.63 | 59 |