# Counterfactual Generation with Answer Set Programming

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.04382 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04382/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 13 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 6 Feb 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1603.02754/) (2016)
- [Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00399/) (2017)
- [Actionable Recourse in Linear Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.06514/) (2018)
- [Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.06278/) (2020)
- [Efficient Search for Diverse Coherent Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.04909/) (2019)
- [Interpretable Predictions of Tree-based Ensembles via Actionable Feature Tweaking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.06691/) (2017)
- [Measurable Counterfactual Local Explanations for Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.03020/) (2019)
- [Constraint Answer Set Programming without Grounding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.11162/) (2018)
- [FOLD-SE: An Efficient Rule-based Machine Learning Algorithm with Scalable Explainability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.07912/) (2022)
- [A New Algorithm to Automate Inductive Learning of Default Theories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.02693/) (2017)
- [FOLD-R++: A Scalable Toolset for Automated Inductive Learning of Default Theories from Mixed Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.07843/) (2021)
- [Answer-Set Programs for Reasoning about Counterfactual Interventions and Responsibility Scores for Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.10159/) (2021)
- [FOLD-RM: A Scalable, Efficient, and Explainable Inductive Learning Algorithm for Multi-Category Classification of Mixed Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.06913/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Machine learning models that automate decision-making are increasingly being used in consequential areas such as loan approvals, pretrial bail approval, hiring, and many more. Unfortunately, most of these models are black-boxes, i.e., they are unable to reveal how they reach these prediction decisions. A need for transparency demands justification for such predictions. An affected individual might also desire explanations to understand why a decision was made. Ethical and legal considerations may further require informing the individual of changes in the input attribute that could be made to produce a desirable outcome. This paper focuses on the latter problem of automatically generating counterfactual explanations. We propose a framework Counterfactual Generation with s(CASP) (CFGS) that utilizes answer set programming (ASP) and the s(CASP) goal-directed ASP system to automatically generate counterfactual explanations from rules generated by rule-based machine learning (RBML) algorithms. In our framework, we show how counterfactual explanations are computed and justified by imagining worlds where some or all factual assumptions are altered/changed. More importantly, we show how we can navigate between these worlds, namely, go from our original world/scenario where we obtain an undesired outcome to the imagined world/scenario where we obtain a desired/favourable outcome.