Model Explanations via the Axiomatic Causal Lens
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Explaining the decisions of black-box models is a central theme in the study of trustworthy ML. Numerous measures have been proposed in the literature; however, none of them take an axiomatic approach to causal explainability. In this work, we propose three explanation measures which aggregate the set of all but-for causes -- a necessary and sufficient explanation -- into feature importance weights. Our first measure is a natural adaptation of Chockler and Halpern's notion of causal responsibility, whereas the other two correspond to existing game-theoretic influence measures. We present an axiomatic treatment for our proposed indices, showing that they can be uniquely characterized by a set of desirable properties. We also extend our approach to derive a new method to compute the Shapley-Shubik and Banzhaf indices for black-box model explanations. Finally, we analyze and compare the necessity and sufficiency of all our proposed explanation measures in practice using the Adult-Income dataset. Thus, our work is the first to formally bridge the gap between model explanations, game-theoretic influence, and causal analysis.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 74 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Sep 2021.
Builds on
28 of 74 references.
References · 28
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,201
- 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 612
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
- 2019The many Shapley values for model explanationcited by 341
- 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 327
- 2013Direct and Indirect Effectscited by 276
- 2020Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventionscited by 250
- 2019Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Consequential Decisionscited by 204
16 more
- 2020Problems with Shapley-value-based explanations as feature importance measurescited by 198
- 2019Feature relevance quantification in explainable AI: A causal problemcited by 164
- 2019Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifierscited by 143
- 2020True to the Model or True to the Data?cited by 123
- 2019Asymmetric Shapley values: incorporating causal knowledge into model-agnostic explainabilitycited by 114
- 2020Shapley explainability on the data manifoldcited by 88
- 2020Towards Unifying Feature Attribution and Counterfactual Explanations: Different Means to the Same Endcited by 66
- 2020Explaining Naive Bayes and Other Linear Classifiers with Polynomial Time and Delaycited by 56
- 2021Explaining Black-Box Algorithms Using Probabilistic Contrastive Counterfactualscited by 55
- 2020Shapley Flow: A Graph-based Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 51
- 2019Measurable Counterfactual Local Explanations for Any Classifiercited by 48
- 2021Local Explanations via Necessity and Sufficiency: Unifying Theory and Practicecited by 45
- 2020Computing Optimal Decision Sets with SATcited by 16
- 2020High Dimensional Model Explanations: an Axiomatic Approachcited by 13
- 2021Individual Explanations in Machine Learning Models: A Survey for Practitionerscited by 6
- 2019A Learning Framework for Distribution-Based Game-Theoretic Solution Conceptscited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1.
1 paper.
- 2023A Measure-Theoretic Axiomatisation of Causalitycited by 8
- 2023A Measure-Theoretic Axiomatisation of Causality19 May 2023