ArticlePloS one2024
RETRACTED: An inherently interpretable deep learning model for local explanations using visual concepts.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2026-04-02Concerns/Issues about Article · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Objections by Author(s) ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past decade, deep learning has become the leading approach for various computer vision tasks and decision support systems. However, the opaque nature of deep learning models raises significant concerns about their fairness, reliability, and the underlying inferences they make. Many existing methods attempt to approximate the relationship between low-level input features and outcomes. However, humans tend to understand and reason based on high-level concepts rather than low-level input features. To bridge this gap, several concept-based interpretable methods have been developed. Most of these methods compute the importance of each discovered concept for a specific class. However, they often fail to provide local explanations. Additionally, these approaches typically rely on labeled concepts or learn directly from datasets, leading to the extraction of irrelevant concepts. They also tend to overlook the potential of these concepts to interpret model predictions effectively. This research proposes a two-stream model called the Cross-Attentional Fast/Slow Thinking Network (CA-SoftNet) to address these issues. The model is inspired by dual-process theory and integrates two key components: a shallow convolutional neural network (sCNN) as System-I for rapid, implicit pattern recognition and a cross-attentional concept memory network as System-II for transparent, controllable, and logical reasoning. Our evaluation across diverse datasets demonstrates the model's competitive accuracy, achieving 85.6%, 83.7%, 93.6%, and 90.3% on CUB 200-2011, Stanford Cars, ISIC 2016, and ISIC 2017, respectively. This performance outperforms existing interpretable models and is comparable to non-interpretable counterparts. Furthermore, our novel concept extraction method facilitates identifying and selecting salient concepts. These concepts are then used to generate concept-based local explanations that align with human thinking. Additionally, the model's ability to share similar concepts across distinct classes, such as in fine-grained classification, enhances its scalability for large datasets. This feature also induces human-like cognition and reasoning within the proposed framework.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.