[19] P. W. Koh, T. Nguyen, Y. S. Tang, S. Mussmann, E. Pierson, B. Kim, and P. Liang. Concept bottleneck models. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 5338-5348. PMLR, 2020. 3
[20] Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton. Deep learning. nature, 521(7553):436-444, 2015. 3
[21] M. Ledoux and M. Talagrand. Probability in Banach Spaces: isoperimetry and processes, volume 23. Springer Science & Business Media, 1991. 15
[22] J. Li, V. Nagarajan, G. Plumb, and A. Talwalkar. A learning theoretic perspective on local explainability. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020. 3
[23] S. M. Lundberg and S.-I. Lee. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017. 3
[24] T. Ma. Lecture notes from machine learning theory, 2022. URL http://web.stanford.edu/class/stats214/.7, 14, 26
[25] R. K. Mothilal, A. Sharma, and C. Tan. Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, pages 607-617, 2020. 3
[26] W. J. Murdoch, P. J. Liu, and B. Yu. Beyond word importance: Contextual decomposition to extract interactions from lstms. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2018. 3
[27] N. Natarajan, I. S. Dhillon, P. K. Ravikumar, and A. Tewari. Learning with noisy labels. Advances in neural information processing systems, 26, 2013. 17
[28] R. Pukdee, D. Sam, P. K. Ravikumar, and N. Balcan. Label propagation with weak supervision. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. 17
[29] A. Ratner, S. H. Bach, H. Ehrenberg, J. Fries, S. Wu, and C. Ré. Snorkel: Rapid training data creation with weak supervision. In Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment. International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, volume 11, page 269. NIH Public Access, 2017. 17
[30] A. J. Ratner, C. M. De Sa, S. Wu, D. Selsam, and C. Ré. Data programming: Creating large training sets, quickly. Advances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016. 17, 35
[31] M. T. Ribeiro, S. Singh, and C. Guestrin. "why should i trust you?" explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 1135-1144, 2016. 1, 3
[32] L. Rieger, C. Singh, W. Murdoch, and B. Yu. Interpretations are useful: penalizing explanations to align neural networks with prior knowledge. In International conference on machine learning, pages 8116-8126. PMLR, 2020. 1, 2, 3, 7
[33] A. S. Ross, M. C. Hughes, and F. Doshi-Velez. Right for the right reasons: training differentiable models by constraining their explanations. In Proceedings of the 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 2662-2670, 2017. 1, 2, 3, 8, 16
[34] H. Shao, O. Montasser, and A. Blum. A theory of PAC learnability under transformation invariances. In A. H. Oh, A. Agarwal, D. Belgrave, and K. Cho, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=11WlfNaRkKw.3
[35] D. Smilkov, N. Thorat, B. Kim, F. Viégas, and M. Wattenberg. Smoothgrad: removing noise by adding noise. ICML Workshop on Visualization for Deep Learning, 2017, 2017. 1, 3
[36] J. Stacey, Y. Belinkov, and M. Rei. Supervising model attention with human explanations for robust natural language inference. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 36, pages 11349-11357, 2022. 1, 3
[37] M. Sundararajan, A. Taly, and Q. Yan. Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. In International conference on machine learning, pages 3319-3328. PMLR, 2017. 3