VISLIX: An XAI Framework for Validating Vision Models with Slice Discovery and Analysis

Real-world machine learning models require rigorous evaluation before deployment, especially in safety-critical domains like autonomous driving and surveillance. The evaluation of machine learning models often focuses on data slices, which are subsets of the data that share a set of characteristics. Data slice finding automatically identifies conditions or data subgroups where models underperform, aiding developers in mitigating performance issues. Despite its popularity and effectiveness, data slicing for vision model validation faces several challenges. First, data slicing often needs additional image metadata or visual concepts, and falls short in certain computer vision tasks, such as object detection. Second, understanding data slices is a labor-intensive and mentally demanding process that heavily relies on the expert's domain knowledge. Third, data slicing lacks a human-in-the-loop solution that allows experts to form hypothesis and test them interactively. To overcome these limitations and better support the machine learning operations lifecycle, we introduce VISLIX, a novel visual analytics framework that employs state-of-the-art foundation models to help domain experts analyze slices in computer vision models. Our approach does not require image metadata or visual concepts, automatically generates natural language insights, and allows users to test data slice hypothesis interactively. We evaluate VISLIX with an expert study and three use cases, that demonstrate the effectiveness of our tool in providing comprehensive insights for validating object detection models.

See or Recall: A Sanity Check for the Role of Vision in Solving Visualization Question Answer Tasks with Multimodal LLMs

Recent developments in multimodal large language models (MLLM) have equipped language models to reason about vision and language jointly. This permits MLLMs to both perceive and answer questions about data visualization across a variety of designs and tasks. Applying MLLMs to a broad range of visualization tasks requires us to properly evaluate their capabilities, and the most common way to conduct evaluation is through measuring a model's visualization reasoning capability, analogous to how we would evaluate human understanding of visualizations (e.g., visualization literacy). However, we found that in the context of visualization question answering (VisQA), how an MLLM perceives and reasons about visualizations can be fundamentally different from how humans approach the same problem. During the evaluation, even without visualization, the model could correctly answer a substantial portion of the visualization test questions, regardless of whether any selection options were provided. We hypothesize that the vast amount of knowledge encoded in the language model permits factual recall that supersedes the need to seek information from the visual signal. It raises concerns that the current VisQA evaluation may not fully capture the models' visualization reasoning capabilities. To address this, we propose a comprehensive sanity check framework that integrates a rule-based decision tree and a sanity check table to disentangle the effects of "seeing" (visual processing) and "recall" (reliance on prior knowledge). This validates VisQA datasets for evaluation, highlighting where models are truly "seeing", positively or negatively affected by the factual recall, or relying on inductive biases for question answering. Our study underscores the need for careful consideration in designing future visualization understanding studies when utilizing MLLMs.