Is ProtoPNet Really Explainable? Evaluating and Improving the Interpretability of Prototypes

ProtoPNet and its follow-up variants (ProtoPNets) have attracted broad research interest for their intrinsic interpretability from prototypes and comparable accuracy to non-interpretable counterparts. However, it has been recently found that the interpretability of prototypes can be corrupted due to the semantic gap between similarity in latent space and that in input space. In this work, we make the first attempt to quantitatively evaluate the interpretability of prototype-based explanations, rather than solely qualitative evaluations by some visualization examples, which can be easily misled by cherry picks. To this end, we propose two evaluation metrics, termed consistency score and stability score, to evaluate the explanation consistency cross images and the explanation robustness against perturbations, both of which are essential for explanations taken into practice. Furthermore, we propose a shallow-deep feature alignment (SDFA) module and a score aggregation (SA) module to improve the interpretability of prototypes. We conduct systematical evaluation experiments and substantial discussions to uncover the interpretability of existing ProtoPNets. Experiments demonstrate that our method achieves significantly superior performance to the state-of-the-arts, under both the conventional qualitative evaluations and the proposed quantitative evaluations, in both accuracy and interpretability. Codes are available at https://github.com/hqhQAQ/EvalProtoPNet.