mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On Formal Feature Attribution and Its Approximation

arXiv 2307.03380 ↗First posted 7 Jul 2023cs.AI cs.LG cs.LOcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent years have witnessed the widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms and machine learning (ML) models. Despite their tremendous success, a number of vital problems like ML model brittleness, their fairness, and the lack of interpretability warrant the need for the active developments in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) and formal ML model verification. The two major lines of work in XAI include feature selection methods, e.g. Anchors, and feature attribution techniques, e.g. LIME and SHAP. Despite their promise, most of the existing feature selection and attribution approaches are susceptible to a range of critical issues, including explanation unsoundness and out-of-distribution sampling. A recent formal approach to XAI (FXAI) although serving as an alternative to the above and free of these issues suffers from a few other limitations. For instance and besides the scalability limitation, the formal approach is unable to tackle the feature attribution problem. Additionally, a formal explanation despite being formally sound is typically quite large, which hampers its applicability in practical settings. Motivated by the above, this paper proposes a way to apply the apparatus of formal XAI to the case of feature attribution based on formal explanation enumeration. Formal feature attribution (FFA) is argued to be advantageous over the existing methods, both formal and non-formal. Given the practical complexity of the problem, the paper then proposes an efficient technique for approximating exact FFA. Finally, it offers experimental evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed approximate FFA in comparison to the existing feature attribution algorithms not only in terms of feature importance and but also in terms of their relative order.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2023.

Builds on

36 of 78 references.

References · 36

  1. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  3. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,120
  4. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  5. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  6. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,201
  7. 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 716
  8. 2021MedMNIST v2 -- A large-scale lightweight benchmark for 2D and 3D biomedical image classificationcited by 682
  9. 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
  10. 2018Abduction-Based Explanations for Machine Learning Modelscited by 159
  11. 2017PMLB: A Large Benchmark Suite for Machine Learning Evaluation and Comparisoncited by 139
  12. 2018A Symbolic Approach to Explaining Bayesian Network Classifierscited by 130
24 more
  1. 2020Reliable Post hoc Explanations: Modeling Uncertainty in Explainabilitycited by 125
  2. 2019"How do I fool you?": Manipulating User Trust via Misleading Black Box Explanationscited by 111
  3. 2020On The Reasons Behind Decisionscited by 99
  4. 2021On Explaining Random Forests with SATcited by 57
  5. 2020Explaining Naive Bayes and Other Linear Classifiers with Polynomial Time and Delaycited by 56
  6. 2021On Guaranteed Optimal Robust Explanations for NLP Modelscited by 54
  7. 2022Logic-Based Explainability in Machine Learningcited by 47
  8. 2022On Tackling Explanation Redundancy in Decision Treescited by 44
  9. 2021SAT-Based Rigorous Explanations for Decision Listscited by 40
  10. 2021Explanations for Monotonic Classifierscited by 39
  11. 2022On Computing Probabilistic Explanations for Decision Treescited by 35
  12. 2021On the Complexity of SHAP-Score-Based Explanations: Tractability via Knowledge Compilation and Non-Approximability Resultscited by 32
  13. 2021Provably efficient, succinct, and precise explanationscited by 32
  14. 2023The Inadequacy of Shapley Values for Explainabilitycited by 30
  15. 2021Foundations of Symbolic Languages for Model Interpretabilitycited by 26
  16. 2022ASTERYX : A model-Agnostic SaT-basEd appRoach for sYmbolic and score-based eXplanationscited by 26
  17. 2022Eliminating The Impossible, Whatever Remains Must Be Truecited by 23
  18. 2022Feature Necessity & Relevancy in ML Classifier Explanationscited by 22
  19. 2022On Computing Probabilistic Abductive Explanationscited by 18
  20. 2021On Quantifying Literals in Boolean Logic and Its Applications to Explainable AIcited by 16
  21. 2023Delivering Inflated Explanationscited by 16
  22. 2021JITLine: A Simpler, Better, Faster, Finer-grained Just-In-Time Defect Predictioncited by 14
  23. 2023From Robustness to Explainability and Back Againcited by 14
  24. 2023Disproving XAI Myths with Formal Methods -- Initial Resultscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 5; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

11 papers.