mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Trustworthy Actionable Perturbations

arXiv 2405.11195 ↗First posted 18 May 2024cs.LG cs.AI cs.ITcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Counterfactuals, or modified inputs that lead to a different outcome, are an important tool for understanding the logic used by machine learning classifiers and how to change an undesirable classification. Even if a counterfactual changes a classifier's decision, however, it may not affect the true underlying class probabilities, i.e. the counterfactual may act like an adversarial attack and ``fool'' the classifier. We propose a new framework for creating modified inputs that change the true underlying probabilities in a beneficial way which we call Trustworthy Actionable Perturbations (TAP). This includes a novel verification procedure to ensure that TAP change the true class probabilities instead of acting adversarially. Our framework also includes new cost, reward, and goal definitions that are better suited to effectuating change in the real world. We present PAC-learnability results for our verification procedure and theoretically analyze our new method for measuring reward. We also develop a methodology for creating TAP and compare our results to those achieved by previous counterfactual methods.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2024.

Builds on

28 of 42 references.

References · 28

  1. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,155
  2. 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,998
  3. 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,089
  4. 2019Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanationscited by 614
  5. 2017One pixel attack for fooling deep neural networkscited by 582
  6. 2017Adversarial Examples Are Not Easily Detected: Bypassing Ten Detection Methodscited by 546
  7. 2021Tabular Data: Deep Learning is Not All You Needcited by 535
  8. 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 328
  9. 2020Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventionscited by 250
  10. 2019FACE: Feasible and Actionable Counterfactual Explanationscited by 233
  11. 2019Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Consequential Decisionscited by 204
  12. 2018Local Rule-Based Explanations of Black Box Decision Systemscited by 166
16 more
  1. 2020Multi-Objective Counterfactual Explanationscited by 157
  2. 2019Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifierscited by 144
  3. 2020Algorithmic recourse under imperfect causal knowledge: a probabilistic approachcited by 140
  4. 2019The Odds are Odd: A Statistical Test for Detecting Adversarial Examplescited by 75
  5. 2019ML-LOO: Detecting Adversarial Examples with Feature Attributioncited by 48
  6. 2021Adversarial Attacks for Tabular Data: Application to Fraud Detection and Imbalanced Datacited by 45
  7. 2020The Intriguing Relation Between Counterfactual Explanations and Adversarial Examplescited by 44
  8. 2019When Explainability Meets Adversarial Learning: Detecting Adversarial Examples using SHAP Signaturescited by 40
  9. 2019Imperceptible Adversarial Attacks on Tabular Datacited by 35
  10. 2018Adversarial Risk and Robustness: General Definitions and Implications for the Uniform Distributioncited by 32
  11. 2019On the Hardness of Robust Classificationcited by 23
  12. 2019Synthesizing Action Sequences for Modifying Model Decisionscited by 22
  13. 2022Improvement-Focused Causal Recourse (ICR)cited by 20
  14. 2013Adaptive Metric Dimensionality Reductioncited by 14
  15. 2020Not All Datasets Are Born Equal: On Heterogeneous Data and Adversarial Examplescited by 9
  16. 2022Personalized Algorithmic Recourse with Preference Elicitationcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 2.

3 papers.