We are concerned with investigating the apparent effective-ness of Radford et al.’s “Sentiment Neuron,” which they claim encapsulates sufficient knowledge to accurately predict sentiment in reviews. In our analysis of the Sentiment Neuron, we find that the removal of the neuron only marginally affects a classifier’s ability to detect and label sentiment and may even improve performance. Moreover, the effectiveness of the Sentiment Neuron can be surpassed by simply using 100 random neurons as features to the same classifier. Using adversarial examples, we show that the generated representation containing the Sentiment Neuron (i.e., the final hidden cell state in a LSTM) is particularly sensitive to the end of a processed sequence. Accordingly, we find that caution needs to be applied when interpreting neuron-based feature representations and potential flaws should be addressed for real-world applicability.
Back to
Science
On Interpretability and Feature Representations: An Analysis of the Sentiment Neuron
Share this article:
Read more papers

On Tradeoffs Between Document Signature Methods for a Legal Due Diligence Corpus
We present an examination of the tradeoffs that document signature methods face in the due diligence domain. In particular, we quantify the trade-off between signature length, time to compute, number of hash collisions, and number of nearest neighbours for a 90,000 document due diligence corpus.

From Bubbles to Lists: Designing Clustering for Due Diligence
In an effort to aid users to review more efficiently, we sought to determine how document-level clustering may help users of a due diligence system during their workflow.