Generating Counterfactual Explanations Using Cardinality Constraints
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Providing explanations about how machine learning algorithms work and/or make particular predictions is one of the main tools that can be used to improve their trusworthiness, fairness and robustness. Among the most intuitive type of explanations are counterfactuals, which are examples that differ from a given point only in the prediction target and some set of features, presenting which features need to be changed in the original example to flip the prediction for that example. However, such counterfactuals can have many different features than the original example, making their interpretation difficult. In this paper, we propose to explicitly add a cardinality constraint to counterfactual generation limiting how many features can be different from the original example, thus providing more interpretable and easily understantable counterfactuals.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Apr 2024.
Builds on
7 of 11 references.
References · 7
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
- 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
- 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 612
- 2018Techniques for Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 238
- 2018Towards Explanation of DNN-based Prediction with Guided Feature Inversioncited by 31
Built on by
Not cited yet.