mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

RoCourseNet: Distributionally Robust Training of a Prediction Aware Recourse Model

arXiv 2206.00700 ↗First posted 1 Jun 2022cs.LGcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Counterfactual (CF) explanations for machine learning (ML) models are preferred by end-users, as they explain the predictions of ML models by providing a recourse (or contrastive) case to individuals who are adversely impacted by predicted outcomes. Existing CF explanation methods generate recourses under the assumption that the underlying target ML model remains stationary over time. However, due to commonly occurring distributional shifts in training data, ML models constantly get updated in practice, which might render previously generated recourses invalid and diminish end-users trust in our algorithmic framework. To address this problem, we propose RoCourseNet, a training framework that jointly optimizes predictions and recourses that are robust to future data shifts. This work contains four key contributions: (1) We formulate the robust recourse generation problem as a tri-level optimization problem which consists of two sub-problems: (i) a bi-level problem that finds the worst-case adversarial shift in the training data, and (ii) an outer minimization problem to generate robust recourses against this worst-case shift. (2) We leverage adversarial training to solve this tri-level optimization problem by: (i) proposing a novel virtual data shift (VDS) algorithm to find worst-case shifted ML models via explicitly considering the worst-case data shift in the training dataset, and (ii) a block-wise coordinate descent procedure to optimize for prediction and corresponding robust recourses. (3) We evaluate RoCourseNet's performance on three real-world datasets, and show that RoCourseNet consistently achieves more than 96% robust validity and outperforms state-of-the-art baselines by at least 10% in generating robust CF explanations. (4) Finally, we generalize the RoCourseNet framework to accommodate any parametric post-hoc methods for improving robust validity.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 43 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jun 2022.

Builds on

43 of 58 references.

References · 43

  1. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  3. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
  4. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  5. 2017Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning for Fast Adaptation of Deep Networkscited by 4,861
  6. 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,714
  7. 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,309
  8. 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
  9. 2020Fast is better than free: Revisiting adversarial trainingcited by 723
  10. 2019Adversarial Training for Free!cited by 638
  11. 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 612
  12. 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
31 more
  1. 2019Hidden Trigger Backdoor Attackscited by 359
  2. 2015Gradient-based Hyperparameter Optimization through Reversible Learningcited by 357
  3. 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 327
  4. 2018Adversarially Robust Generalization Requires More Datacited by 318
  5. 2018On the Robustness of Interpretability Methodscited by 310
  6. 2020Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventionscited by 250
  7. 2019Interpretable Counterfactual Explanations Guided by Prototypescited by 223
  8. 2018Truncated Back-propagation for Bilevel Optimizationcited by 187
  9. 2019Learning Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Tabular Datacited by 146
  10. 2019Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifierscited by 143
  11. 2021On the Convergence and Robustness of Adversarial Trainingcited by 127
  12. 2020A survey of algorithmic recourse: definitions, formulations, solutions, and prospectscited by 118
  13. 2019The Hidden Assumptions Behind Counterfactual Explanations and Principal Reasonscited by 115
  14. 2020MetaPoison: Practical General-purpose Clean-label Data Poisoningcited by 114
  15. 2021Towards Robust and Reliable Algorithmic Recoursecited by 101
  16. 2018Curriculum Adversarial Trainingcited by 89
  17. 2018How Important Is a Neuron?cited by 73
  18. 2020On Counterfactual Explanations under Predictive Multiplicitycited by 73
  19. 2021On the Adversarial Robustness of Causal Algorithmic Recoursecited by 56
  20. 2021A Survey on the Robustness of Feature Importance and Counterfactual Explanationscited by 38
  21. 2021Consistent Counterfactuals for Deep Modelscited by 37
  22. 2020Algorithmic Recourse in the Wild: Understanding the Impact of Data and Model Shiftscited by 34
  23. 2018Defining Locality for Surrogates in Post-hoc Interpretablitycited by 33
  24. 2018Influence-Directed Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networkscited by 31
  25. 2020Efficient Robust Training via Backward Smoothingcited by 29
  26. 2022Attribution-based Explanations that Provide Recourse Cannot be Robustcited by 20
  27. 2015Evading the curse of dimensionality in nonparametric density estimation with simplified vine copulascited by 18
  28. 2021CounterNet: End-to-End Training of Prediction Aware Counterfactual Explanationscited by 17
  29. 2022On the Effectiveness of Adversarial Training against Backdoor Attackscited by 15
  30. 2021Model-Based Counterfactual Synthesizer for Interpretationcited by 14
  31. 2022Min-Max Bilevel Multi-objective Optimization with Applications in Machine Learningcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 5; 2026: 2.

11 papers.