Achieving robustness to distributional shift is a longstanding and challenging goal of computer vision. Data augmentation is a commonly used approach for improving robustness, however robustness gains are typically not uniform across corruption types. Indeed increasing performance in the presence of random noise is often met with reduced performance on other corruptions such as contrast change. Understanding when and why these sorts of trade-offs occur is a crucial step towards mitigating them. Towards this end, we investigate recently observed tradeoffs caused by Gaussian data augmentation and adversarial training. We find that both methods improve robustness to corruptions that are concentrated in the high frequency domain while reducing robustness to corruptions that are concentrated in the low frequency domain. This suggests that one way to mitigate these trade-offs via data augmentation is to use a more diverse set of augmentations. Towards this end we observe that AutoAugment [6], a recently proposed data augmentation policy optimized for clean accuracy, achieves state-of-the-art robustness on the CIFAR-10-C [17] benchmark.

Saliency methods have emerged as a popular tool to highlight features in an input deemed relevant for the prediction of a learned model. Several saliency methods have been proposed, often guided by visual appeal on image data. In this work, we propose an actionable methodology to evaluate what kinds of explanations a given method can and cannot provide. We find that reliance, solely, on visual assessment can be misleading. Through extensive experiments we show that some existing saliency methods are independent both of the model and of the data generating process. Consequently, methods that fail the proposed tests are inadequate for tasks that are sensitive to either data or model, such as, finding outliers in the data, explaining the relationship between inputs and outputs that the model learned, and debugging the model. We interpret our findings through an analogy with edge detection in images, a technique that requires neither training data nor model.

Achieving robustness to distributional shift is a longstanding and challenging goal of computer vision. Data augmentation is a commonly used approach for improving robustness, however robustness gains are typically not uniform across corruption types. Indeed increasing performance in the presence of random noise is often met with reduced performance on other corruptions such as contrast change. Understanding when and why these sorts of trade-offs occur is a crucial step towards mitigating them. Towards this end, we investigate recently observed tradeoffs caused by Gaussian data augmentation and adversarial training. We find that both methods improve robustness to corruptions that are concentrated in the high frequency domain while reducing robustness to corruptions that are concentrated in the low frequency domain. This suggests that one way to mitigate these trade-offs via data augmentation is to use a more diverse set of augmentations. Towards this end we observe that AutoAugment [6], a recently proposed data augmentation policy optimized for clean accuracy, achieves state-of-the-art robustness on the CIFAR-10-C [17] benchmark.

We propose a new technique, Singular Vector Canonical Correlation Analysis (SVCCA), a tool for quickly comparing two representations in a way that is both invariant to affine transform (allowing comparison between different layers and networks) and fast to compute (allowing more comparisons to be calculated than with previous methods). We deploy this tool to measure the intrinsic dimensionality of layers, showing in some cases needless over-parameterization; to probe learning dynamics throughout training, finding that networks converge to final representations from the bottom up; to show where class-specific information in networks is formed; and to suggest new training regimes that simultaneously save computation and overfit less.

Saliency methods have emerged as a popular tool to highlight features in an input deemed relevant for the prediction of a learned model. Several saliency methods have been proposed, often guided by visual appeal on image data. In this work, we propose an actionable methodology to evaluate what kinds of explanations a given method can and cannot provide. We find that reliance, solely, on visual assessment can be misleading. Through extensive experiments we show that some existing saliency methods are independent both of the model and of the data generating process. Consequently, methods that fail the proposed tests are inadequate for tasks that are sensitive to either data or model, such as, finding outliers in the data, explaining the relationship between inputs and outputs that the model learned, and debugging the model. We interpret our findings through an analogy with edge detection in images, a technique that requires neither training data nor model.

We propose a new technique, Singular Vector Canonical Correlation Analysis (SVCCA), a tool for quickly comparing two representations in a way that is both invariant to affine transform (allowing comparison between different layers and networks) and fast to compute (allowing more comparisons to be calculated than with previous methods). We deploy this tool to measure the intrinsic dimensionality of layers, showing in some cases needless over-parameterization; to probe learning dynamics throughout training, finding that networks converge to final representations from the bottom up; to show where class-specific information in networks is formed; and to suggest new training regimes that simultaneously save computation and overfit less.