Update image paths
This commit is contained in:
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ VGG models have the largest, most spatially coarse attention patterns of any mod
|
||||
|
||||
**VGG19**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -91,11 +91,11 @@ ResNets produce more distributed, semantically coherent attention than VGG. The
|
||||
|
||||
**ResNet50**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**ResNet101**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ DenseNet produces the most distributed, multi-scale attention patterns. Because
|
||||
|
||||
**DenseNet121**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ Because features are detected at multiple scales simultaneously throughout the n
|
||||
|
||||
**InceptionV3**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ MobileNet produces the sparsest, most minimal attention maps. It often fixates o
|
||||
|
||||
**MobileNetV3**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ These are the different mathematical techniques used to ask "what pixels mattere
|
||||
|
||||
The simplest approach: take the partial derivative of the classification output with respect to each input pixel. The result is noisy, almost like static or grain, because it shows every pixel that had *any* influence at all.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ Takes Vanilla Gradients but runs it many times with small random noise added to
|
||||
|
||||
The `smoothgrad_samples` parameter controls how many noisy runs are averaged. More = smoother but proportionally slower.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ Instead of computing gradients at only the input image, this traces a path from
|
||||
|
||||
The `ig_steps` parameter controls how many interpolation steps are taken. More steps = more accurate attribution, slower computation.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ The `ig_steps` parameter controls how many interpolation steps are taken. More s
|
||||
|
||||
A variant of Integrated Gradients where instead of interpolating from a black image to the input, it interpolates from a *heavily blurred version* of the image to the sharp version. The difference in what's being integrated changes what gets attributed.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ A variant of Integrated Gradients where instead of interpolating from a black im
|
||||
|
||||
Another IG variant that uses gradient information to choose a smarter integration path, concentrating steps where the gradients are largest rather than taking uniform steps. This produces sharper, higher-contrast attribution maps with more defined edges.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ Another IG variant that uses gradient information to choose a smarter integratio
|
||||
|
||||
A completely different approach. Instead of pixel-level gradient computation, XRAI segments the image into regions using an oversegmentation algorithm, then attributes importance to each region as a whole by measuring how much removing it changes the model's output.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ These control how the saliency map is composited back onto the original image. T
|
||||
|
||||
Salient regions appear in full color using the chosen colormap; everything else converts to greyscale.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ Salient regions appear in full color using the chosen colormap; everything else
|
||||
Classic heatmap blend. The colormap is alpha-composited over the original at the `intensity` level.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ Classic heatmap blend. The colormap is alpha-composited over the original at the
|
||||
|
||||
Salient regions are bright; everything else darkens.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ Salient regions are bright; everything else darkens.
|
||||
|
||||
The original image fades to 25% opacity and the saliency map layers over it.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ The original image fades to 25% opacity and the saliency map layers over it.
|
||||
|
||||
Shows what the algorithm *ignores* instead of what it sees. The saliency map is inverted before compositing.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ Shows what the algorithm *ignores* instead of what it sees. The saliency map is
|
||||
|
||||
Hard binary mask. Pixels above the `threshold` value show the original image in full; everything below shows a dim version of the heatmap.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ Hard binary mask. Pixels above the `threshold` value show the original image in
|
||||
|
||||
Photoshop-style multiply blend.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ Photoshop-style multiply blend.
|
||||
|
||||
Photoshop-style screen blend. Attention brightens salient regions.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ Photoshop-style screen blend. Attention brightens salient regions.
|
||||
|
||||
Outputs three panels side by side: original image | saliency map alone | composite. Shows the full chain of the visualization in one frame.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ Outputs three panels side by side: original image | saliency map alone | composi
|
||||
|
||||
Just the colored saliency map with no original image.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ Just the colored saliency map with no original image.
|
||||
|
||||
Black background, saliency values mapped directly to white intensity.
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -335,43 +335,43 @@ These apply a color gradient to the greyscale saliency values. Low values (less
|
||||
|
||||
**cool**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**hot**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**copper**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**inferno**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**magma**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**ocean**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**plasma**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**spring**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**twilight**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**viridis**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -387,11 +387,11 @@ Default: **0.75** — chosen as the midpoint that preserves enough of the origin
|
||||
|
||||
**intensity = 0.5** (lower)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**intensity = 1.0** (higher / full)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -403,11 +403,11 @@ Default: **1.5**.
|
||||
|
||||
**contrast = 1.0** (flat, no adjustment)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**contrast = 2.0** (more aggressive)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -419,11 +419,11 @@ Default: **0.25** — chosen to eliminate low-confidence gradient noise while pr
|
||||
|
||||
**threshold = 0.0** (nothing filtered)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**threshold = 0.5** (aggressive filtering)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -437,11 +437,11 @@ The classification label output of the node always shows what class is actually
|
||||
|
||||
**class_index = 1** (a modest override)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
**class_index = 10** (a larger displacement)
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ Default: **true** — the aesthetic improvement is significant and the default s
|
||||
|
||||
**use_smoothgrad = false**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ Default: **25**
|
||||
|
||||
**samples = 50**
|
||||
|
||||

|
||||

|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user