mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SHAP-XRT: The Shapley Value Meets Conditional Independence Testing

arXiv 2207.07038 ↗First posted 14 Jul 2022cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The complex nature of artificial neural networks raises concerns on their reliability, trustworthiness, and fairness in real-world scenarios. The Shapley value -- a solution concept from game theory -- is one of the most popular explanation methods for machine learning models. More traditionally, from a statistical perspective, feature importance is defined in terms of conditional independence. So far, these two approaches to interpretability and feature importance have been considered separate and distinct. In this work, we show that Shapley-based explanation methods and conditional independence testing are closely related. We introduce the SHAPley EXplanation Randomization Test (SHAP-XRT), a testing procedure inspired by the Conditional Randomization Test (CRT) for a specific notion of local (i.e., on a sample) conditional independence. With it, we prove that for binary classification problems, the marginal contributions in the Shapley value provide lower and upper bounds to the expected p-values of their respective tests. Furthermore, we show that the Shapley value itself provides an upper bound to the expected p-value of a global (i.e., overall) null hypothesis. As a result, we further our understanding of Shapley-based explanation methods from a novel perspective and characterize the conditions under which one can make statistically valid claims about feature importance via the Shapley value.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 42 of its 95 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jul 2022.

Builds on

42 of 95 references.

References · 42

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  3. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  4. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
  5. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  6. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  7. 2015Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localizationcited by 2,436
  8. 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
  9. 2017Deep Setscited by 1,421
  10. 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,156
  11. 2016Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regressioncited by 668
  12. 2019Data Shapley: Equitable Valuation of Data for Machine Learningcited by 629
30 more
  1. 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 612
  2. 2019The many Shapley values for model explanationcited by 344
  3. 2020Explaining by Removing: A Unified Framework for Model Explanationcited by 218
  4. 2019Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to Shapley valuescited by 208
  5. 2019Feature relevance quantification in explainable AI: A causal problemcited by 167
  6. 2022Data Banzhaf: A Robust Data Valuation Framework for Machine Learningcited by 132
  7. 2020True to the Model or True to the Data?cited by 126
  8. 2021FastSHAP: Real-Time Shapley Value Estimationcited by 125
  9. 2016Panning for Gold: Model-X Knockoffs for High-dimensional Controlled Variable Selectioncited by 121
  10. 2019Asymmetric Shapley values: incorporating causal knowledge into model-agnostic explainabilitycited by 114
  11. 2018L-Shapley and C-Shapley: Efficient Model Interpretation for Structured Datacited by 100
  12. 2022The Shapley Value in Machine Learningcited by 98
  13. 2020Shapley explainability on the data manifoldcited by 88
  14. 2020A Distributional Framework for Data Valuationcited by 80
  15. 2021Shapley values for feature selection: The good, the bad, and the axiomscited by 54
  16. 2021Do Input Gradients Highlight Discriminative Features?cited by 52
  17. 2018Interpretable to Whom? A Role-based Model for Analyzing Interpretable Machine Learning Systemscited by 48
  18. 2022Learning to Estimate Shapley Values with Vision Transformerscited by 45
  19. 2022Missingness Bias in Model Debuggingcited by 38
  20. 2020Transparency, Auditability and eXplainability of Machine Learning Models in Credit Scoringcited by 26
  21. 2018Cauchy combination test: a powerful test with analytic p-value calculation under arbitrary dependency structurescited by 20
  22. 2020Fast and Powerful Conditional Randomization Testing via Distillationcited by 19
  23. 2020Explainable AI for Interpretable Credit Scoringcited by 18
  24. 2017Choosing Between Methods of Combining p-valuescited by 17
  25. 2020Predictive and Causal Implications of using Shapley Value for Model Interpretationcited by 16
  26. 2021Fast Hierarchical Games for Image Explanationscited by 15
  27. 2021Cartoon Explanations of Image Classifierscited by 15
  28. 2021Decorrelated Variable Importancecited by 13
  29. 2021A Rate-Distortion Framework for Explaining Black-box Model Decisionscited by 11
  30. 2017An omnibus test for the global null hypothesiscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

6 papers.