mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Comparative Study of Methods for Estimating Conditional Shapley Values and When to Use Them

arXiv 2305.09536 ↗First posted 16 May 2023stat.ML cs.LG stat.COcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Shapley values originated in cooperative game theory but are extensively used today as a model-agnostic explanation framework to explain predictions made by complex machine learning models in the industry and academia. There are several algorithmic approaches for computing different versions of Shapley value explanations. Here, we focus on conditional Shapley values for predictive models fitted to tabular data. Estimating precise conditional Shapley values is difficult as they require the estimation of non-trivial conditional expectations. In this article, we develop new methods, extend earlier proposed approaches, and systematize the new refined and existing methods into different method classes for comparison and evaluation. The method classes use either Monte Carlo integration or regression to model the conditional expectations. We conduct extensive simulation studies to evaluate how precisely the different method classes estimate the conditional expectations, and thereby the conditional Shapley values, for different setups. We also apply the methods to several real-world data experiments and provide recommendations for when to use the different method classes and approaches. Roughly speaking, we recommend using parametric methods when we can specify the data distribution almost correctly, as they generally produce the most accurate Shapley value explanations. When the distribution is unknown, both generative methods and regression models with a similar form as the underlying predictive model are good and stable options. Regression-based methods are often slow to train but produce the Shapley value explanations quickly once trained. The vice versa is true for Monte Carlo-based methods, making the different methods appropriate in different practical situations.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 44 of its 122 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 May 2023.

Builds on

44 of 122 references.

References · 44

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  3. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  4. 2015Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classificationcited by 3,611
  5. 2019An Introduction to Variational Autoencoderscited by 1,000
  6. 2018GAIN: Missing Data Imputation using Generative Adversarial Netscited by 352
  7. 2019The many Shapley values for model explanationcited by 344
  8. 2018Consistent Individualized Feature Attribution for Tree Ensemblescited by 285
  9. 2020Explaining by Removing: A Unified Framework for Model Explanationcited by 218
  10. 2019Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to Shapley valuescited by 208
  11. 2020Problems with Shapley-value-based explanations as feature importance measurescited by 200
  12. 2015ranger: A Fast Implementation of Random Forests for High Dimensional Data in C++ and Rcited by 172
32 more
  1. 2020True to the Model or True to the Data?cited by 126
  2. 2021FastSHAP: Real-Time Shapley Value Estimationcited by 125
  3. 2019Explaining Deep Neural Networks with a Polynomial Time Algorithm for Shapley Values Approximationcited by 115
  4. 2022Algorithms to estimate Shapley value feature attributionscited by 115
  5. 2020Causal Shapley Values: Exploiting Causal Knowledge to Explain Individual Predictions of Complex Modelscited by 107
  6. 2021Sampling Permutations for Shapley Value Estimationcited by 102
  7. 2016Neural Autoregressive Distribution Estimationcited by 95
  8. 2020Shapley explainability on the data manifoldcited by 88
  9. 2016Entity Embeddings of Categorical Variablescited by 87
  10. 2022Diffusion models for missing value imputation in tabular datacited by 77
  11. 2020TimeSHAP: Explaining Recurrent Models through Sequence Perturbationscited by 74
  12. 2018Variational Autoencoder with Arbitrary Conditioningcited by 68
  13. 2021GraphSVX: Shapley Value Explanations for Graph Neural Networkscited by 64
  14. 2020Efficient nonparametric statistical inference on population feature importance using Shapley valuescited by 61
  15. 2021Shapley values for feature selection: The good, the bad, and the axiomscited by 54
  16. 2020Shapley Flow: A Graph-based Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 51
  17. 2021Explaining a Series of Models by Propagating Shapley Valuescited by 37
  18. 2020A Multilinear Sampling Algorithm to Estimate Shapley Valuescited by 33
  19. 2019Flow Models for Arbitrary Conditional Likelihoodscited by 30
  20. 2019Explaining black box decisions by Shapley cohort refinementcited by 26
  21. 2022SurvSHAP(t): Time-dependent explanations of machine learning survival modelscited by 24
  22. 2021SHAFF: Fast and consistent SHApley eFfect estimates via random Forestscited by 22
  23. 2021groupShapley: Efficient prediction explanation with Shapley values for feature groupscited by 21
  24. 2021Using Shapley Values and Variational Autoencoders to Explain Predictive Models with Dependent Mixed Featurescited by 19
  25. 2013A Mixture of Generalized Hyperbolic Distributionscited by 18
  26. 2014The Evolution of Boosting Algorithms - From Machine Learning to Statistical Modellingcited by 18
  27. 2020Explaining predictive models with mixed features using Shapley values and conditional inference treescited by 18
  28. 2019Learning about an exponential amount of conditional distributionscited by 12
  29. 2017A Universal Marginalizer for Amortized Inference in Generative Modelscited by 9
  30. 2021Explaining predictive models using Shapley values and non-parametric vine copulascited by 9
  31. 2017Mixtures of Generalized Hyperbolic Distributions and Mixtures of Skew-t Distributions for Model-Based Clustering with Incomplete Datacited by 4
  32. 2019A hybrid machine learning framework for analyzing human decision making through learning preferencescited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 6; 2025: 3; 2026: 3.

15 papers.

Sort: