mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Model Explanations via the Axiomatic Causal Lens

arXiv 2109.03890 ↗First posted 8 Sep 2021cs.LGcited by 1

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

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  2. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  3. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  4. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  5. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,201
  6. 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 612
  7. 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
  8. 2019The many Shapley values for model explanationcited by 341
  9. 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 327
  10. 2013Direct and Indirect Effectscited by 276
  11. 2020Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventionscited by 250
  12. 2019Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Consequential Decisionscited by 204
16 more
  1. 2020Problems with Shapley-value-based explanations as feature importance measurescited by 198
  2. 2019Feature relevance quantification in explainable AI: A causal problemcited by 164
  3. 2019Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifierscited by 143
  4. 2020True to the Model or True to the Data?cited by 123
  5. 2019Asymmetric Shapley values: incorporating causal knowledge into model-agnostic explainabilitycited by 114
  6. 2020Shapley explainability on the data manifoldcited by 88
  7. 2020Towards Unifying Feature Attribution and Counterfactual Explanations: Different Means to the Same Endcited by 66
  8. 2020Explaining Naive Bayes and Other Linear Classifiers with Polynomial Time and Delaycited by 56
  9. 2021Explaining Black-Box Algorithms Using Probabilistic Contrastive Counterfactualscited by 55
  10. 2020Shapley Flow: A Graph-based Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 51
  11. 2019Measurable Counterfactual Local Explanations for Any Classifiercited by 48
  12. 2021Local Explanations via Necessity and Sufficiency: Unifying Theory and Practicecited by 45
  13. 2020Computing Optimal Decision Sets with SATcited by 16
  14. 2020High Dimensional Model Explanations: an Axiomatic Approachcited by 13
  15. 2021Individual Explanations in Machine Learning Models: A Survey for Practitionerscited by 6
  16. 2019A Learning Framework for Distribution-Based Game-Theoretic Solution Conceptscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1.

1 paper.