# Towards User Guided Actionable Recourse

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.02517 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.02517/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 19 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Sep 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 19 of 19)

- [Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6572/) (2014)
- [Intriguing properties of neural networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6199/) (2013)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00399/) (2017)
- [Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07697/) (2019)
- [Actionable Recourse in Linear Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.06514/) (2018)
- [FACE: Feasible and Actionable Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.09369/) (2019)
- [Learning Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Tabular Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.09398/) (2019)
- [Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.03277/) (2019)
- [Algorithmic recourse under imperfect causal knowledge: a probabilistic approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.06831/) (2020)
- [Efficient Search for Diverse Coherent Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.04909/) (2019)
- [Getting a CLUE: A Method for Explaining Uncertainty Estimates](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.06848/) (2020)
- [CARLA: A Python Library to Benchmark Algorithmic Recourse and Counterfactual Explanation Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.00783/) (2021)
- [Exploring Counterfactual Explanations Through the Lens of Adversarial Examples: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09992/) (2021)
- [Inverse Classification for Comparison-based Interpretability in Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.08443/) (2017)
- [DECE: Decision Explorer with Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.08353/) (2020)
- [Issues with post-hoc counterfactual explanations: a discussion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.04774/) (2019)
- [Low-Cost Algorithmic Recourse for Users With Uncertain Cost Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.01235/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [From Universal to Individualized Actionability: Revisiting Personalization in Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.08030/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Machine Learning's proliferation in critical fields such as healthcare, banking, and criminal justice has motivated the creation of tools which ensure trust and transparency in ML models. One such tool is Actionable Recourse (AR) for negatively impacted users. AR describes recommendations of cost-efficient changes to a user's actionable features to help them obtain favorable outcomes. Existing approaches for providing recourse optimize for properties such as proximity, sparsity, validity, and distance-based costs. However, an often-overlooked but crucial requirement for actionability is a consideration of User Preference to guide the recourse generation process. In this work, we attempt to capture user preferences via soft constraints in three simple forms: i) scoring continuous features, ii) bounding feature values and iii) ranking categorical features. Finally, we propose a gradient-based approach to identify User Preferred Actionable Recourse (UP-AR). We carried out extensive experiments to verify the effectiveness of our approach.