Prediction without Preclusion: Recourse Verification with Reachable Sets
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning models are often used to decide who receives a loan, a job interview, or a public benefit. Models in such settings use features without considering their actionability. As a result, they can assign predictions that are fixed - meaning that individuals who are denied loans and interviews are, in fact, precluded from access to credit and employment. In this work, we introduce a procedure called recourse verification to test if a model assigns fixed predictions to its decision subjects. We propose a model-agnostic approach for recourse verification with reachable sets - i.e., the set of all points that a person can reach through their actions in feature space. We develop methods to construct reachable sets for discrete feature spaces, which can certify the responsiveness of any model by simply querying its predictions. We conduct a comprehensive empirical study on the infeasibility of recourse on datasets from consumer finance. Our results highlight how models can inadvertently preclude access by assigning fixed predictions and underscore the need to account for actionability in model development.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 54 of its 98 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Aug 2023.
Builds on
54 of 98 references.
References · 54
- 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,089
- 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 614
- 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 328
- 2015Strategic Classificationcited by 257
- 2020Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventionscited by 250
- 2019FACE: Feasible and Actionable Counterfactual Explanationscited by 233
- 2019Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Consequential Decisionscited by 204
- 2017Formal Guarantees on the Robustness of a Classifier against Adversarial Manipulationcited by 185
- 2019Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: Evaluating Claims and Practicescited by 174
- 2020Counterfactual Explanations and Algorithmic Recourses for Machine Learning: A Reviewcited by 174
- 2019Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifierscited by 144
- 2020Algorithmic recourse under imperfect causal knowledge: a probabilistic approachcited by 140
38 more
- 2019Towards Realistic Individual Recourse and Actionable Explanations in Black-Box Decision Making Systemscited by 131
- 2017Strategic Classification from Revealed Preferencescited by 128
- 2020A survey of algorithmic recourse: definitions, formulations, solutions, and prospectscited by 118
- 2019The Hidden Assumptions Behind Counterfactual Explanations and Principal Reasonscited by 115
- 2019Efficient Search for Diverse Coherent Explanationscited by 111
- 2018The Social Cost of Strategic Classificationcited by 105
- 2021Towards Robust and Reliable Algorithmic Recoursecited by 102
- 2019Strategic Classification is Causal Modeling in Disguisecited by 92
- 2018How Do Classifiers Induce Agents To Invest Effort Strategically?cited by 83
- 2021Counterfactual Invariance to Spurious Correlations: Why and How to Pass Stress Testscited by 77
- 2017Interpretable Predictions of Tree-based Ensembles via Actionable Feature Tweakingcited by 76
- 2020On the Fairness of Causal Algorithmic Recoursecited by 70
- 2021Strategic Classification in the Darkcited by 66
- 2020Causal Strategic Linear Regressioncited by 65
- 2021Strategic Classification Made Practicalcited by 59
- 2021On the Adversarial Robustness of Causal Algorithmic Recoursecited by 56
- 2019Equalizing Recourse across Groupscited by 55
- 2021Causally motivated Shortcut Removal Using Auxiliary Labelscited by 55
- 2019On the Long-term Impact of Algorithmic Decision Policies: Effort Unfairness and Feature Segregation through Social Learningcited by 49
- 2015Evasion and Hardening of Tree Ensemble Classifierscited by 44
- 2020DECE: Decision Explorer with Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Modelscited by 38
- 2020Algorithmic Recourse in the Wild: Understanding the Impact of Data and Model Shiftscited by 36
- 2021Optimal Counterfactual Explanations in Tree Ensemblescited by 36
- 2021Stateful Strategic Regressioncited by 32
- 2023Algorithmic Collective Action in Machine Learningcited by 31
- 2020Efficient Training of Robust Decision Trees Against Adversarial Examplescited by 24
- 2021Amortized Generation of Sequential Algorithmic Recourses for Black-box Modelscited by 24
- 2019Synthesizing Action Sequences for Modifying Model Decisionscited by 22
- 2022Improvement-Focused Causal Recourse (ICR)cited by 20
- 2018Learning under selective labels in the presence of expert consistencycited by 18
- 2020Learning Models for Actionable Recoursecited by 18
- 2022Adversarial Robustness for Tabular Data through Cost and Utility Awarenesscited by 15
- 2017Evaluating Robustness of Neural Networks with Mixed Integer Programmingcited by 14
- 2021Bayesian Persuasion for Algorithmic Recoursecited by 14
- 2019Treant: Training Evasion-Aware Decision Treescited by 12
- 2023Achieving Diversity in Counterfactual Explanations: a Review and Discussioncited by 11
- 2021Low-Cost Algorithmic Recourse for Users With Uncertain Cost Functionscited by 10
- 2022Learning Counterfactually Invariant Predictorscited by 10
50 most cited of 54 All 54 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 3.
4 papers.
- 2025Responsiveness Verification: Will Predictions Change? How Much? How Often?2 Jul 2025
- 2025Regretful Decisions under Label Noise12 Apr 2025
- 2025Understanding Fixed Predictions via Confined Regions22 Feb 2025
- 2024Feature Responsiveness Scores: Model-Agnostic Explanations for Recourse29 Oct 2024