aiqbench analysis
This study exposes critical flaws in evaluating saliency maps for medical AI, demonstrating that explanation faithfulness is highly sensitive to perturbation strategies and evaluation design. By analyzing a Vision Transformer on breast MRI data, the authors reveal that standard benchmarks often conflate class-specific and class-agnostic explanations, potentially misleading clinicians about model behavior. The findings underscore the urgent need for standardized, robust frameworks to ensure explainability tools genuinely reflect a model's decision process in high-stakes clinical settings.
Faithful Faithfulness Evaluations: Challenges & Pitfalls Learned from a Breast MRI Case Study
arXiv:2609.25978v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Saliency maps are widely used to explain deep learning predictions in medical imaging, yet visually plausible explanations do not necessarily reflect a model's true decision process and may therefore mislead clinicians. We investigate this problem using a Vision Transformer-based breast MRI classifier trained on the ODELIA Breast MRI Challenge dataset and evaluate multiple saliency methods, including Last-layer Attention, Attention Rollout, Grad-SAM, Gradient Attention Rollout, GMAR, Grad-CAM, and HiResCAM. Our study highlights two often-overlooked challenges in perturbation-based faithfulness evaluation. First, method rankings depend strongly on the perturbation strategy, varying across intensity-based perturbations and transformer-based attention masking. Second, benchmarking saliency methods requires distinguishing between class-specific and class-agnostic explanations. To enable fair comparisons, we introduce non-class-specific variants of gradient-based methods and evaluate both settings separately. Across protocols, Grad-CAM and Gradient Attention Rollout consistently emerged as the strongest class-specific methods, although their relative ranking depended on the evaluation design. These findings expose important limitations of current saliency-based explainability approaches and highlight the need for more robust and standardized evaluation frameworks for trustworthy clinical AI systems.
Abstract:Saliency maps are widely used to explain deep learning predictions in medical imaging, yet visually plausible explanations do not necessarily reflect a model's true decision process and may therefore mislead clinicians. We investigate this problem using a Vision Transformer-based breast MRI classifier trained on the ODELIA Breast MRI Challenge dataset and evaluate multiple saliency methods, including Last-layer Attention, Attention Rollout, Grad-SAM, Gradient Attention Rollout, GMAR, Grad-CAM, and HiResCAM. Our study highlights two often-overlooked challenges in perturbation-based faithfulness evaluation. First, method rankings depend strongly on the perturbation strategy, varying across intensity-based perturbations and transformer-based attention masking. Second, benchmarking saliency methods requires distinguishing between class-specific and class-agnostic explanations. To enable fair comparisons, we introduce non-class-specific variants of gradient-based methods and evaluate both settings separately. Across protocols, Grad-CAM and Gradient Attention Rollout consistently emerged as the strongest class-specific methods, although their relative ranking depended on the evaluation design. These findings expose important limitations of current saliency-based explainability approaches and highlight the need for more robust and standardized evaluation frameworks for trustworthy clinical AI systems.
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Image and Video Processing (eess.IV)
arXiv:2609.25978 [cs.CV]
(or arXiv:2609.25978v1 [cs.CV] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.25978 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 279 words
Related coverage
How to build a cancer vaccine, and whether they will work this time
LessWrong · Jun 8, 2026

Amazon Research Awards recipients announced
Amazon Science · May 27, 2026

34 Amazon Research Awards Build on Trainium recipients announced
Amazon Science · Aug 5, 2026
Amazon is investing in the Lean Focused Research Organization
Amazon Science · Jul 26, 2026