# Explaining Groups of Instances Counterfactually for XAI: A Use Case, Algorithm and User Study for Group-Counterfactuals

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.09297 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.09297/

## Key facts

- Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 37 of its 66 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Mar 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 37)

- [Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08608/) (2017)
- [Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.07269/) (2017)
- [Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00399/) (2017)
- [A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.01933/) (2018)
- [Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07697/) (2019)
- [Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.04884/) (2021)
- [Counterfactual Visual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.07451/) (2019)
- [Explanations based on the Missing: Towards Contrastive Explanations with Pertinent Negatives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.07623/) (2018)
- [Metrics for Explainable AI: Challenges and Prospects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.04608/) (2018)
- [Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.06278/) (2020)
- [FACE: Feasible and Actionable Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.09369/) (2019)
- [Local Rule-Based Explanations of Black Box Decision Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.10820/) (2018)
- [One Explanation Does Not Fit All: A Toolkit and Taxonomy of AI Explainability Techniques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.03012/) (2019)
- [Multi-Objective Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.11165/) (2020)
- [Algorithmic recourse under imperfect causal knowledge: a probabilistic approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.06831/) (2020)
- [Towards Realistic Individual Recourse and Actionable Explanations in Black-Box Decision Making Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.09615/) (2019)
- [The Hidden Assumptions Behind Counterfactual Explanations and Principal Reasons](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.04930/) (2019)
- [Counterfactual Explanations Can Be Manipulated](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.02666/) (2021)
- [If Only We Had Better Counterfactual Explanations: Five Key Deficits to Rectify in the Evaluation of Counterfactual XAI Techniques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.01035/) (2021)
- [Good Counterfactuals and Where to Find Them: A Case-Based Technique for Generating Counterfactuals for Explainable AI (XAI)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.13997/) (2020)
- [An Evaluation of the Human-Interpretability of Explanation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.00006/) (2019)
- [One Explanation Does Not Fit All: The Promise of Interactive Explanations for Machine Learning Transparency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.09734/) (2020)
- [Instance-based Counterfactual Explanations for Time Series Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.13211/) (2020)
- [NICE: An Algorithm for Nearest Instance Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.07411/) (2021)
- [On Generating Plausible Counterfactual and Semi-Factual Explanations for Deep Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.06399/) (2020)
- [The Use and Misuse of Counterfactuals in Ethical Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.05085/) (2021)
- [Interpretable Credit Application Predictions With Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.05245/) (2018)
- [Connecting Algorithmic Research and Usage Contexts: A Perspective of Contextualized Evaluation for Explainable AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.10847/) (2022)
- [Why Does My Model Fail? Contrastive Local Explanations for Retail Forecasting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.00085/) (2019)
- [Explaining Groups of Points in Low-Dimensional Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.01640/) (2020)

## Built on by (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [AI, Meet Human: Learning Paradigms for Hybrid Decision Making Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06287/) (2024)
- [Counterfactual Metarules for Local and Global Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.18875/) (2024)
- [Distributional Counterfactual Explanations With Optimal Transport](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.13112/) (2024)
- [GLANCE: Global Actions in a Nutshell for Counterfactual Explainability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.18921/) (2024)
- [A Two-Stage Algorithm for Cost-Efficient Multi-instance Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.01221/) (2024)
- [Reason to explain: Interactive contrastive explanations (REASONX)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18143/) (2023)
- [One-for-many Counterfactual Explanations by Column Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.09473/) (2024)
- [Collective Counterfactual Explanations: Balancing Individual Goals and Collective Dynamics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04579/) (2024)
- [Explainable bank failure prediction models: Counterfactual explanations to reduce the failure risk](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.11089/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Counterfactual explanations are an increasingly popular form of post hoc explanation due to their (i) applicability across problem domains, (ii) proposed legal compliance (e.g., with GDPR), and (iii) reliance on the contrastive nature of human explanation. Although counterfactual explanations are normally used to explain individual predictive-instances, we explore a novel use case in which groups of similar instances are explained in a collective fashion using ``group counterfactuals'' (e.g., to highlight a repeating pattern of illness in a group of patients). These group counterfactuals meet a human preference for coherent, broad explanations covering multiple events/instances. A novel, group-counterfactual algorithm is proposed to generate high-coverage explanations that are faithful to the to-be-explained model. This explanation strategy is also evaluated in a large, controlled user study (N=207), using objective (i.e., accuracy) and subjective (i.e., confidence, explanation satisfaction, and trust) psychological measures. The results show that group counterfactuals elicit modest but definite improvements in people's understanding of an AI system. The implications of these findings for counterfactual methods and for XAI are discussed.