mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

ShaRP: Explaining Rankings and Preferences with Shapley Values

arXiv 2401.16744 ↗First posted 30 Jan 2024cs.AI cs.CYcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Algorithmic decisions in critical domains such as hiring, college admissions, and lending are often based on rankings. Given the impact of these decisions on individuals, organizations, and population groups, it is essential to understand them - to help individuals improve their ranking position, design better ranking procedures, and ensure legal compliance. In this paper, we argue that explainability methods for classification and regression, such as SHAP, are insufficient for ranking tasks, and present ShaRP - Shapley Values for Rankings and Preferences - a framework that explains the contributions of features to various aspects of a ranked outcome. ShaRP computes feature contributions for various ranking-specific profit functions, such as rank and top-k, and also includes a novel Shapley value-based method for explaining pairwise preference outcomes. We provide a flexible implementation of ShaRP, capable of efficiently and comprehensively explaining ranked and pairwise outcomes over tabular data, in score-based ranking and learning-to-rank tasks. Finally, we develop a comprehensive evaluation methodology for ranking explainability methods, showing through qualitative, quantitative, and usability studies that our rank-aware QoIs offer complementary insights, scale effectively, and help users interpret ranked outcomes in practice.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Jan 2024.

Builds on

17 of 42 references.

References · 17

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  3. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,201
  4. 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 970
  5. 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 443
  6. 2016Model-Agnostic Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 219
  7. 2020Explaining by Removing: A Unified Framework for Model Explanationcited by 218
  8. 2020Evaluating and Aggregating Feature-based Model Explanationscited by 185
  9. 2022Algorithms to estimate Shapley value feature attributionscited by 114
  10. 2019A study on the Interpretability of Neural Retrieval Models using DeepSHAPcited by 19
  11. 2018EXS: Explainable Search Using Local Model Agnostic Interpretabilitycited by 18
  12. 2016An unexpected unity among methods for interpreting model predictionscited by 16
5 more
  1. 2020Learning Inconsistent Preferences with Gaussian Processescited by 11
  2. 2018A Nutritional Label for Rankingscited by 10
  3. 2018Posthoc Interpretability of Learning to Rank Models using Secondary Training Datacited by 10
  4. 2022Rank-LIME: Local Model-Agnostic Feature Attribution for Learning to Rankcited by 7
  5. 2021Identifying Biased Subgroups in Ranking and Classificationcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

3 papers.