mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Exploring Energy Landscapes for Minimal Counterfactual Explanations: Applications in Cybersecurity and Beyond

arXiv 2503.18185 ↗First posted 23 Mar 2025cs.AI cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Counterfactual explanations have emerged as a prominent method in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), providing intuitive and actionable insights into Machine Learning model decisions. In contrast to other traditional feature attribution methods that assess the importance of input variables, counterfactual explanations focus on identifying the minimal changes required to alter a model's prediction, offering a ``what-if'' analysis that is close to human reasoning. In the context of XAI, counterfactuals enhance transparency, trustworthiness and fairness, offering explanations that are not just interpretable but directly applicable in the decision-making processes. In this paper, we present a novel framework that integrates perturbation theory and statistical mechanics to generate minimal counterfactual explanations in explainable AI. We employ a local Taylor expansion of a Machine Learning model's predictive function and reformulate the counterfactual search as an energy minimization problem over a complex landscape. In sequence, we model the probability of candidate perturbations leveraging the Boltzmann distribution and use simulated annealing for iterative refinement. Our approach systematically identifies the smallest modifications required to change a model's prediction while maintaining plausibility. Experimental results on benchmark datasets for cybersecurity in Internet of Things environments, demonstrate that our method provides actionable, interpretable counterfactuals and offers deeper insights into model sensitivity and decision boundaries in high-dimensional spaces.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Mar 2025.

Builds on

19 of 55 references.

References · 19

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  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. 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 328
  6. 2017How to Escape Saddle Points Efficientlycited by 285
  7. 2019FACE: Feasible and Actionable Counterfactual Explanationscited by 233
  8. 2019Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Consequential Decisionscited by 204
  9. 2020Counterfactual Explanations and Algorithmic Recourses for Machine Learning: A Reviewcited by 174
  10. 2019Efficient Search for Diverse Coherent Explanationscited by 111
  11. 2020Explaining NLP Models via Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE)cited by 106
  12. 2020Towards Unifying Feature Attribution and Counterfactual Explanations: Different Means to the Same Endcited by 66
7 more
  1. 2018Local Saddle Point Optimization: A Curvature Exploitation Approachcited by 28
  2. 2022Formalising the Robustness of Counterfactual Explanations for Neural Networkscited by 24
  3. 2022MACE: An Efficient Model-Agnostic Framework for Counterfactual Explanationcited by 12
  4. 2023Counterfactual Explanation for Fairness in Recommendationcited by 9
  5. 2022Thermodynamics-inspired Explanations of Artificial Intelligencecited by 6
  6. 2023Generative Perturbation Analysis for Probabilistic Black-Box Anomaly Attributioncited by 6
  7. 2024Enhancing Counterfactual Explanation Search with Diffusion Distance and Directional Coherencecited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 5.

6 papers.