The Challenge of Imputation in Explainable Artificial Intelligence Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Explainable models in Artificial Intelligence are often employed to ensure transparency and accountability of AI systems. The fidelity of the explanations are dependent upon the algorithms used as well as on the fidelity of the data. Many real world datasets have missing values that can greatly influence explanation fidelity. The standard way to deal with such scenarios is imputation. This can, however, lead to situations where the imputed values may correspond to a setting which refer to counterfactuals. Acting on explanations from AI models with imputed values may lead to unsafe outcomes. In this paper, we explore different settings where AI models with imputation can be problematic and describe ways to address such scenarios.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 29 Jul 2019.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.
5 papers.
- 2021Explainable AI (XAI): A Systematic Meta-Survey of Current Challenges and Future Opportunitiescited by 125
- 2022Imputation Strategies Under Clinical Presence: Impact on Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 6
- 2024The Impact of Differential Feature Under-reporting on Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 4
- 2023Algorithmic Recourse with Missing Valuescited by 2
- 2025Learning Over Dirty Data with Minimal Repairscited by 0
- 2025Learning Over Dirty Data with Minimal Repairs18 Mar 2025
- 2024The Impact of Differential Feature Under-reporting on Algorithmic Fairness16 Jan 2024
- 2023Algorithmic Recourse with Missing Values28 Apr 2023
- 2022Imputation Strategies Under Clinical Presence: Impact on Algorithmic Fairness13 Aug 2022
- 2021Explainable AI (XAI): A Systematic Meta-Survey of Current Challenges and Future Opportunities11 Nov 2021