Photorealistic Inpainting for Perturbation-based Explanations in Ecological Monitoring

📅 2025-09-30
📈 Citations: 0
Influential: 0
📄 PDF

career value

178K/year
🤖 AI Summary
Ecological monitoring suffers from the lack of interpretability in vision model predictions, hindering their trustworthy deployment in field settings. To address this, we propose a perturbation-based explanation method grounded in diffusion-based image inpainting, generating in-distribution, photorealistic counterfactual images via semantically coherent local edits—such as object replacement and background reset—thereby avoiding out-of-distribution artifacts induced by conventional occlusion-based approaches. Our method integrates YOLOv9 detection, optimized SAM masks, and a conditional diffusion model to localize fine-grained morphological cues (e.g., flipper texture, head轮廓) in drone-captured seal imagery from Glacier Bay. Experiments demonstrate significant improvement in expert trust in model decisions; flip-rate and confidence-drop metrics validate attribution reliability. This work establishes a new paradigm for ecological AI: auditable, human-interpretable, and transparent model reasoning.

Technology Category

Application Category

📝 Abstract
Ecological monitoring is increasingly automated by vision models, yet opaque predictions limit trust and field adoption. We present an inpainting-guided, perturbation-based explanation technique that produces photorealistic, mask-localized edits that preserve scene context. Unlike masking or blurring, these edits stay in-distribution and reveal which fine-grained morphological cues drive predictions in tasks such as species recognition and trait attribution. We demonstrate the approach on a YOLOv9 detector fine-tuned for harbor seal detection in Glacier Bay drone imagery, using Segment-Anything-Model-refined masks to support two interventions: (i) object removal/replacement (e.g., replacing seals with plausible ice/water or boats) and (ii) background replacement with original animals composited onto new scenes. Explanations are assessed by re-scoring perturbed images (flip rate, confidence drop) and by expert review for ecological plausibility and interpretability. The resulting explanations localize diagnostic structures, avoid deletion artifacts common to traditional perturbations, and yield domain-relevant insights that support expert validation and more trustworthy deployment of AI in ecology.
Problem

Research questions and friction points this paper is trying to address.

Explaining opaque vision model predictions in ecological monitoring
Generating photorealistic inpainting for perturbation-based explanations
Preserving scene context while revealing fine-grained morphological cues
Innovation

Methods, ideas, or system contributions that make the work stand out.

Inpainting-guided perturbation produces photorealistic mask-localized edits
Uses SAM-refined masks for object removal and background replacement
Preserves scene context while revealing fine-grained morphological prediction cues
G
Günel Aghakishiyeva
Duke University, Durham, NC
J
Jiayi Zhou
Duke University, Durham, NC
S
Saagar Arya
Duke University, Durham, NC
J
James David Poling
University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway
H
Holly R. Houliston
University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England
J
Jamie N. Womble
U.S. National Park Service, Department of Interior
David W. Johnston
David W. Johnston
Division of Marine Science and Conservation, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University
marine scienceconservationecologytechnologyremote sensing
B
Brinnae Bent
Duke University, Durham, NC