Most evidence on the effectiveness of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) attribution methods has been established on convolutional neural networks (CNNs), with limited investigation into whether these conclusions generalize to the diverse Vision Transformer (ViT) architectures that now dominate computer vision. This paper presents a controlled benchmark that evaluates attribution quality across five dimensions: faithfulness, localization, robustness, complexity, and computational cost. A standardized framework assesses 13 attribution methods from four algorithmic families on eight representative backbones spanning CNNs, isotropic ViTs, hierarchical transformers, hybrid architectures, and linear-attention transformers. The results show that attribution performance is strongly architecture-dependent and that rankings established on CNNs do not reliably transfer to transformer-based models. CAM-based methods achieve the highest scores under the conventional bounding-box localization metric on CNNs and most ViTs but perform poorly on linear-attention architectures. Pixel-level dense-mask evaluation further reveals that these gains largely reflect metric saturation rather than accurate localization. CAM-based methods also exhibit limited robustness on global-attention transformers, whereas attention rollout provides consistently stable explanations with poor localization. Furthermore, faithfulness correlation offers limited discrimination between attribution methods, highlighting the limitations of single-metric evaluation. These findings challenge prevailing conclusions on attribution performance and demonstrate the need for architecture-aware, multi-dimensional evaluation. The open-source code for the evaluation framework and benchmark results is available at https://github.com/Nishan-Charlie/VIT_XAI_Bench.
Sathiyamohan Nishankar, N. Pathirana, Pubudu Sanjeewani et al.· 0 citations
Vision Transformer (ViT) design has become increasingly diverse, with backbones combining convolutional stems, windowed, linear, or multi-axis attention, patch merging, and spatial reduction in various configurations. This diversity poses challenges for existing attribution methods, whose assumptions often do not hold across ViT variants: Grad-CAM requires a terminal spatial feature map, attention rollout assumes global softmax attention, and layer-wise relevance propagation (LRP) requires module-specific rules. To the best of our knowledge, no existing method provides a unified attribution framework across this architectural space. We show that this architectural diversity can be captured by a simpler underlying structure. The attention and resolution-reduction operators in current ViTs can be decomposed into four operation types: linear maps, bilinear mixing, normalization or gating, and reindexing. Each operation admits a relevance rule that satisfies conservation. Based on these rules, HiLRP supports new backbones by construction rather than by architecture-specific derivation, and its attribution maps decompose the prediction rather than relying on heuristic assumptions. We prove conservation and conditional equivariance and verify both to machine precision. Across 14 attribution methods and 10 architectures, we find that no prior method remains reliable across ViT families, while Faithfulness Correlation becomes uninformative for backbones robust to spatial masking. HiLRP alone preserves conservation across windowed, spatial-reduction, multi-axis, and linear-attention models, where naive extensions can produce zero or inflated relevance. It also localizes attribution failures in class activation mapping, achieving 0.97 Pointing compared with 0.55 for competing methods on EfficientViT.
Sathiyamohan Nishankar, Pubudu Sanjeewani, Asanka Perera et al.· 0 citations
