Fool SHAP with Stealthily Biased Sampling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
SHAP explanations aim at identifying which features contribute the most to the difference in model prediction at a specific input versus a background distribution. Recent studies have shown that they can be manipulated by malicious adversaries to produce arbitrary desired explanations. However, existing attacks focus solely on altering the black-box model itself. In this paper, we propose a complementary family of attacks that leave the model intact and manipulate SHAP explanations using stealthily biased sampling of the data points used to approximate expectations w.r.t the background distribution. In the context of fairness audit, we show that our attack can reduce the importance of a sensitive feature when explaining the difference in outcomes between groups while remaining undetected. More precisely, experiments performed on real-world datasets showed that our attack could yield up to a 90% relative decrease in amplitude of the sensitive feature attribution. These results highlight the manipulability of SHAP explanations and encourage auditors to treat them with skepticism.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 May 2022.
Builds on
12 of 25 references.
References · 12
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 970
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
- 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 402
- 2018AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Biascited by 319
- 2018Aequitas: A Bias and Fairness Audit Toolkitcited by 145
- 2020Shapley explainability on the data manifoldcited by 88
- 2019Fairwashing: the risk of rationalizationcited by 81
- 2020Explainability for fair machine learningcited by 33
- 2021Fooling Partial Dependence via Data Poisoningcited by 16
- 2019Faking Fairness via Stealthily Biased Samplingcited by 14
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
6 papers.
- 2024X Hacking: The Threat of Misguided AutoMLcited by 5
- 2024Fooling SHAP with Output Shuffling Attackscited by 4
- 2025Explainable but Vulnerable: Adversarial Attacks on XAI Explanation in Cybersecurity Applicationscited by 1
- 2026The Unseen Hand: Manipulating Model Fairness and SHAP with Targeted Identity Re-Association Attackscited by 0
- 2026RelShap: Relationally Consistent Shapley Explanationscited by 0
- 2026ExplainGuard: A Zero Trust Framework for Post-Hoc Explanation Integrity Guarantees in Blackbox XAI Modelscited by 0
- 2026ExplainGuard: A Zero Trust Framework for Post-Hoc Explanation Integrity Guarantees in Blackbox XAI Models22 Aug 2026
- 2026RelShap: Relationally Consistent Shapley Explanations11 Aug 2026
- 2026The Unseen Hand: Manipulating Model Fairness and SHAP with Targeted Identity Re-Association Attacks22 Jun 2026
- 2025Explainable but Vulnerable: Adversarial Attacks on XAI Explanation in Cybersecurity Applications4 Oct 2025
- 2024Fooling SHAP with Output Shuffling Attacks12 Aug 2024
- 2024X Hacking: The Threat of Misguided AutoML16 Jan 2024