user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: Explaining Image Classifiers by Counterfactual Generation

Paper content:
When an image classifier makes a prediction, which parts of the image are relevant and why?
We can rephrase this question to ask: which parts of the image, if they were not seen by the classifier, would most change its decision?
Producing an answer requires marginalizing over images that could have been seen but weren't.
We can sample plausible image in-fills by conditioning a generative model on the rest of the image.
We then optimize to find the image regions that most change the classifier's decision after in-fill.
Our approach contrasts with ad-hoc in-filling approaches, such as blurring or injecting noise, which generate inputs far from the data distribution, and ignore informative relationships between different parts of the image.
Our method produces more compact and relevant saliency maps, with fewer artifacts compared to previous methods.
The decisions of powerful image classifiers are difficult to interpret.
Saliency maps are a tool for interpreting differentiable classifiers that, given a particular input example and output class, computes the sensitivity of the classification with respect to each input dimension.
BID3 and BID2 cast saliency computation an optimization problem informally described by the following question: which inputs, when replaced by an uninformative reference value, maximally change the classifier output?
Because these methods use heuristic reference values, e.g. blurred input BID3 or random colors BID2 , they ignore the context of the surrounding pixels, often producing unnatural in-filled images (Figure 2 ).
If we think of a saliency map as interrogating the neural network classifier, these approaches have to deal with a somewhat unusual question of how the classifier responds to images outside of its training distribution.To encourage explanations that are consistent with the data distribution, we modify the question at hand: which region, when replaced by plausible alternative values, would maximally change classifier output?
In this paper we provide a new model-agnostic framework for computing and visualizing feature importance of any differentiable classifier, based on variational Bernoulli dropout BID4 .
We marginalize out the masked region, conditioning the generative model on the non-masked parts of the image to sample counterfactual inputs that either change or preserve classifier behavior.
By leveraging a powerful in-filling conditional generative model we produce saliency maps on ImageNet that identify relevant and concentrated pixels better than existing methods.
We proposed FIDO, a new framework for explaining differentiable classifiers that uses adaptive Bernoulli dropout with strong generative in-filling to combine the best properties of recently proposed methods BID3 BID2 BID18 .
We compute saliency by marginalizing over plausible alternative inputs, revealing concentrated pixel areas that preserve label information.
By quantitative comparisons we find the FIDO saliency map provides more parsimonious explanations than existing methods.
FIDO provides novel but relevant explanations for the classifier in question by highlighting contextual information relevant to the prediction and consistent with the training distribution.
We released the code in PyTorch at https://github.
com/zzzace2000/FIDO-saliency.

assistant: text: We compute saliency by using a strong generative model to efficiently marginalize over plausible alternative inputs, revealing concentrated pixel areas that preserve label information.