Consistent Sufficient Explanations and Minimal Local Rules for explaining regression and classification models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
To explain the decision of any model, we extend the notion of probabilistic Sufficient Explanations (P-SE). For each instance, this approach selects the minimal subset of features that is sufficient to yield the same prediction with high probability, while removing other features. The crux of P-SE is to compute the conditional probability of maintaining the same prediction. Therefore, we introduce an accurate and fast estimator of this probability via random Forests for any data (boldsymbolX, Y) and show its efficiency through a theoretical analysis of its consistency. As a consequence, we extend the P-SE to regression problems. In addition, we deal with non-discrete features, without learning the distribution of boldsymbolX nor having the model for making predictions. Finally, we introduce local rule-based explanations for regression/classification based on the P-SE and compare our approaches w.r.t other explainable AI methods. These methods are available as a Python package at urlwww.github.com/salimamoukou/acv00.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Nov 2021.
Builds on
20 of 52 references.
References · 20
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
- 2015Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forestscited by 597
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
- 2018Explanations based on the Missing: Towards Contrastive Explanations with Pertinent Negativescited by 261
- 2018Learning to Explain: An Information-Theoretic Perspective on Model Interpretationcited by 248
- 2018A Symbolic Approach to Explaining Bayesian Network Classifierscited by 130
- 2020On The Reasons Behind Decisionscited by 99
- 2014Consistency of random forestscited by 84
- 2021Have We Learned to Explain?: How Interpretability Methods Can Learn to Encode Predictions in their Interpretationscited by 59
- 2019On Validating, Repairing and Refining Heuristic ML Explanationscited by 32
8 more
- 2021On Locality of Local Explanation Modelscited by 25
- 2020Interpretable Random Forests via Rule Extractioncited by 23
- 2021SHAFF: Fast and consistent SHApley eFfect estimates via random Forestscited by 22
- 2019Do Not Trust Additive Explanationscited by 15
- 2020Sparse learning with CARTcited by 12
- 2021MDA for random forests: inconsistency, and a practical solution via the Sobol-MDAcited by 10
- 2021Accurate Shapley Values for explaining tree-based modelscited by 9
- 2020Wasserstein Random Forests and Applications in Heterogeneous Treatment Effectscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 2.
4 papers.
- 2022A Sea of Words: An In-Depth Analysis of Anchors for Text Datacited by 6
- 2023Faithful and Robust Local Interpretability for Textual Predictionscited by 2
- 2023Understanding Post-hoc Explainers: The Case of Anchorscited by 1
- 2022Local and Regional Counterfactual Rules: Summarized and Robust Recoursescited by 0
- 2023Faithful and Robust Local Interpretability for Textual Predictions30 Oct 2023
- 2023Understanding Post-hoc Explainers: The Case of Anchors15 Mar 2023
- 2022Local and Regional Counterfactual Rules: Summarized and Robust Recourses29 Sep 2022
- 2022A Sea of Words: An In-Depth Analysis of Anchors for Text Data27 May 2022