# Algorithmic recourse under imperfect causal knowledge: a probabilistic approach

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.06831 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.06831/

## Key facts

- Cited by 140 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2020.

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 140)

- [Towards Causal Representation Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.11107/) (2021)
- [OpenXAI: Towards a Transparent Evaluation of Model Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.11104/) (2022)
- [Counterfactual Explanations Can Be Manipulated](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.02666/) (2021)
- [Towards Robust and Reliable Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.13620/) (2021)
- [CARLA: A Python Library to Benchmark Algorithmic Recourse and Counterfactual Explanation Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.00783/) (2021)
- [If Only We Had Better Counterfactual Explanations: Five Key Deficits to Rectify in the Evaluation of Counterfactual XAI Techniques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.01035/) (2021)
- [Which Explanation Should I Choose? A Function Approximation Perspective to Characterizing Post Hoc Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.01254/) (2022)
- [Strategic Classification Made Practical](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.01826/) (2021)
- [Counterfactuals and Causability in Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.04244/) (2021)
- [On the Adversarial Robustness of Causal Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.11313/) (2021)
- [Explaining Black-Box Algorithms Using Probabilistic Contrastive Counterfactuals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.11972/) (2021)
- [Exploring Counterfactual Explanations Through the Lens of Adversarial Examples: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09992/) (2021)
- [Rethinking Explainability as a Dialogue: A Practitioner's Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.01875/) (2022)
- [Causal normalizing flows: from theory to practice](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05415/) (2023)
- [CLEAR: Generative Counterfactual Explanations on Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.08443/) (2022)
- [Towards the Unification and Robustness of Perturbation and Gradient Based Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.10618/) (2021)
- [Local Explanations via Necessity and Sufficiency: Unifying Theory and Practice](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.14651/) (2021)
- [Probabilistically Robust Recourse: Navigating the Trade-offs between Costs and Robustness in Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.06768/) (2022)
- [From Statistical to Causal Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.00607/) (2022)
- [Counterfactual Explanations in Sequential Decision Making Under Uncertainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.02776/) (2021)
- [Consistent Counterfactuals for Deep Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.03109/) (2021)
- [On the Robustness of Sparse Counterfactual Explanations to Adverse Perturbations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.09051/) (2022)
- [DualCF: Efficient Model Extraction Attack from Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.06504/) (2022)
- [On the Privacy Risks of Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.05427/) (2022)
- [Causal Explanations and XAI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.13169/) (2022)
- [ReLAX: Reinforcement Learning Agent eXplainer for Arbitrary Predictive Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.11960/) (2021)
- [Amortized Generation of Sequential Algorithmic Recourses for Black-box Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.03962/) (2021)
- [Modeling Causal Mechanisms with Diffusion Models for Interventional and Counterfactual Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00860/) (2023)
- [Counterfactual Shapley Additive Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14270/) (2021)
- [Improvement-Focused Causal Recourse (ICR)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.15709/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent work has discussed the limitations of counterfactual explanations to recommend actions for algorithmic recourse, and argued for the need of taking causal relationships between features into consideration. Unfortunately, in practice, the true underlying structural causal model is generally unknown. In this work, we first show that it is impossible to guarantee recourse without access to the true structural equations. To address this limitation, we propose two probabilistic approaches to select optimal actions that achieve recourse with high probability given limited causal knowledge (e.g., only the causal graph). The first captures uncertainty over structural equations under additive Gaussian noise, and uses Bayesian model averaging to estimate the counterfactual distribution. The second removes any assumptions on the structural equations by instead computing the average effect of recourse actions on individuals similar to the person who seeks recourse, leading to a novel subpopulation-based interventional notion of recourse. We then derive a gradient-based procedure for selecting optimal recourse actions, and empirically show that the proposed approaches lead to more reliable recommendations under imperfect causal knowledge than non-probabilistic baselines.