Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
If Concept Bottlenecks are the Question, are Foundation Models the Answer?
by
Teso, Stefano
, Barbiero, Pietro
, Debole, Nicola
, Passerini, Andrea
, Marconato, Emanuele
, Giannini, Francesco
in
Annotations
/ Neural networks
2025
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
If Concept Bottlenecks are the Question, are Foundation Models the Answer?
by
Teso, Stefano
, Barbiero, Pietro
, Debole, Nicola
, Passerini, Andrea
, Marconato, Emanuele
, Giannini, Francesco
in
Annotations
/ Neural networks
2025
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
If Concept Bottlenecks are the Question, are Foundation Models the Answer?
Paper
If Concept Bottlenecks are the Question, are Foundation Models the Answer?
2025
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) are neural networks designed to conjoin high performance with ante-hoc interpretability. CBMs work by first mapping inputs (e.g., images) to high-level concepts (e.g., visible objects and their properties) and then use these to solve a downstream task (e.g., tagging or scoring an image) in an interpretable manner. Their performance and interpretability, however, hinge on the quality of the concepts they learn. The go-to strategy for ensuring good quality concepts is to leverage expert annotations, which are expensive to collect and seldom available in applications. Researchers have recently addressed this issue by introducing \"VLM-CBM\" architectures that replace manual annotations with weak supervision from foundation models. It is however unclear what is the impact of doing so on the quality of the learned concepts. To answer this question, we put state-of-the-art VLM-CBMs to the test, analyzing their learned concepts empirically using a selection of significant metrics. Our results show that, depending on the task, VLM supervision can sensibly differ from expert annotations, and that concept accuracy and quality are not strongly correlated. Our code is available at https://github.com/debryu/CQA.
Publisher
Cornell University Library, arXiv.org
Subject
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.