mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

A k-additive Choquet integral-based approach to approximate the SHAP values for local interpretability in machine learning

arXiv 2211.02166 ↗First posted 3 Nov 2022cs.LGcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Besides accuracy, recent studies on machine learning models have been addressing the question on how the obtained results can be interpreted. Indeed, while complex machine learning models are able to provide very good results in terms of accuracy even in challenging applications, it is difficult to interpret them. Aiming at providing some interpretability for such models, one of the most famous methods, called SHAP, borrows the Shapley value concept from game theory in order to locally explain the predicted outcome of an instance of interest. As the SHAP values calculation needs previous computations on all possible coalitions of attributes, its computational cost can be very high. Therefore, a SHAP-based method called Kernel SHAP adopts an efficient strategy that approximate such values with less computational effort. In this paper, we also address local interpretability in machine learning based on Shapley values. Firstly, we provide a straightforward formulation of a SHAP-based method for local interpretability by using the Choquet integral, which leads to both Shapley values and Shapley interaction indices. Moreover, we also adopt the concept of k-additive games from game theory, which contributes to reduce the computational effort when estimating the SHAP values. The obtained results attest that our proposal needs less computations on coalitions of attributes to approximate the SHAP values.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Nov 2022.

Builds on

13 of 43 references.

References · 13

  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. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,201
  4. 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 716
  5. 2018Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 508
  6. 2019Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to Shapley valuescited by 205
  7. 2015A Random Forest Guided Tourcited by 168
  8. 2019A Comparative Analysis of XGBoostcited by 80
  9. 2019Explainable AI for Trees: From Local Explanations to Global Understandingcited by 64
  10. 2021GLocalX -- From Local to Global Explanations of Black Box AI Modelscited by 48
  11. 2019Explaining Models by Propagating Shapley Values of Local Componentscited by 29
  12. 2020Looking Deeper into Tabular LIMEcited by 20
1 more
  1. 2021Machine Learning-Based Heart Disease Diagnosis: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

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

8 papers.