mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

RESHAPE: Explaining Accounting Anomalies in Financial Statement Audits by enhancing SHapley Additive exPlanations

arXiv 2209.09157 ↗First posted 19 Sep 2022cs.LG cs.CE q-fin.STcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Detecting accounting anomalies is a recurrent challenge in financial statement audits. Recently, novel methods derived from Deep-Learning (DL) have been proposed to audit the large volumes of a statement's underlying accounting records. However, due to their vast number of parameters, such models exhibit the drawback of being inherently opaque. At the same time, the concealing of a model's inner workings often hinders its real-world application. This observation holds particularly true in financial audits since auditors must reasonably explain and justify their audit decisions. Nowadays, various Explainable AI (XAI) techniques have been proposed to address this challenge, e.g., SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). However, in unsupervised DL as often applied in financial audits, these methods explain the model output at the level of encoded variables. As a result, the explanations of Autoencoder Neural Networks (AENNs) are often hard to comprehend by human auditors. To mitigate this drawback, we propose (RESHAPE), which explains the model output on an aggregated attribute-level. In addition, we introduce an evaluation framework to compare the versatility of XAI methods in auditing. Our experimental results show empirical evidence that RESHAPE results in versatile explanations compared to state-of-the-art baselines. We envision such attribute-level explanations as a necessary next step in the adoption of unsupervised DL techniques in financial auditing.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Sep 2022.

Builds on

22 of 54 references.

References · 22

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  3. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  4. 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 970
  5. 2019Deep Learning for Anomaly Detection: A Surveycited by 357
  6. 2018On the Robustness of Interpretability Methodscited by 310
  7. 2019On the (In)fidelity and Sensitivity for Explanationscited by 309
  8. 2020On quantitative aspects of model interpretabilitycited by 71
  9. 2021Synthetic Benchmarks for Scientific Research in Explainable Machine Learningcited by 59
  10. 2020Statistical stability indices for LIME: obtaining reliable explanations for Machine Learning modelscited by 40
  11. 2021A Survey on the Robustness of Feature Importance and Counterfactual Explanationscited by 38
  12. 2019Explaining Anomalies Detected by Autoencoders Using SHAPcited by 27
10 more
  1. 2021To trust or not to trust an explanation: using LEAF to evaluate local linear XAI methodscited by 26
  2. 2017Contextual Outlier Interpretationcited by 19
  3. 2019Shapley Values of Reconstruction Errors of PCA for Explaining Anomaly Detectioncited by 19
  4. 2017Detection of Anomalies in Large Scale Accounting Data using Deep Autoencoder Networkscited by 18
  5. 2021Utilizing XAI technique to improve autoencoder based model for computer network anomaly detection with shapley additive explanation(SHAP)cited by 15
  6. 2019Detection of Accounting Anomalies in the Latent Space using Adversarial Autoencoder Neural Networkscited by 13
  7. 2018Instance-Level Explanations for Fraud Detection: A Case Studycited by 10
  8. 2021Explainable Machine Learning for Fraud Detectioncited by 9
  9. 2021Developing a Fidelity Evaluation Approach for Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 8
  10. 2021Multi-view Contrastive Self-Supervised Learning of Accounting Data Representations for Downstream Audit Taskscited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.

2 papers.