In Defense of Information Leakage in Concept-based Models

Mateo Espinosa Zarlenga
6/9/2026
cs.LGcs.AIcs.CR

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Concept-based models (CMs), deep neural networks that ground their predictions on representations aligned with human-understandable concepts (e.g., "round", "stripes", etc.), have been shown to learn representations that leak concept-irrelevant information. As the traditional narrative goes, this leakage is undesirable and should be eradicated as it leads to uninterpretable models. In this paper, we posit that this conventional view of leakage in CMs is not only ill-posed, as the evidence of how leakage makes a model less interpretable is often inconclusive, but also bound to lead to impractical CMs under common real-world constraints. Specifically, we argue that in real-world settings where concept incompleteness is the norm, some leakage is often necessary for constructing accurate and intervenable CMs. To this end, we propose that there is such a thing as benign leakage and show that, by optimizing a reframing of the typical CM training objective, CMs can encourage and exploit this form of leakage without sacrificing accuracy or intervenability.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{zarlenga2026defense,
  title  = {In Defense of Information Leakage in Concept-based Models},
  author = {Mateo Espinosa Zarlenga},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2606.10669},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.10669v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2606.10669.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2606.10669)

Discussion