Overview and practical recommendations on using Shapley Values for identifying predictive biomarkers via CATE modeling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In recent years, two parallel research trends have emerged in machine learning, yet their intersections remain largely unexplored. On one hand, there has been a significant increase in literature focused on Individual Treatment Effect (ITE) modeling, particularly targeting the Conditional Average Treatment Effect (CATE) using meta-learner techniques. These approaches often aim to identify causal effects from observational data. On the other hand, the field of Explainable Machine Learning (XML) has gained traction, with various approaches developed to explain complex models and make their predictions more interpretable. A prominent technique in this area is Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP), which has become mainstream in data science for analyzing supervised learning models. However, there has been limited exploration of SHAP application in identifying predictive biomarkers through CATE models, a crucial aspect in pharmaceutical precision medicine. We address inherent challenges associated with the SHAP concept in multi-stage CATE strategies and introduce a surrogate estimation approach that is agnostic to the choice of CATE strategy, effectively reducing computational burdens in high-dimensional data. Using this approach, we conduct simulation benchmarking to evaluate the ability to accurately identify biomarkers using SHAP values derived from various CATE meta-learners and Causal Forest.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 82 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 May 2025.
Builds on
32 of 82 references.
References · 32
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
- 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
- 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,458
- 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,109
- 2021Tabular Data: Deep Learning is Not All You Needcited by 535
- 2017Meta-learners for Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Machine Learningcited by 478
- 2019The many Shapley values for model explanationcited by 344
- 2017Quasi-Oracle Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effectscited by 332
- 2016Generalized Random Forestscited by 312
20 more
- 2015Recursive Partitioning for Heterogeneous Causal Effectscited by 255
- 2019Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to Shapley valuescited by 208
- 2016Panning for Gold: Model-X Knockoffs for High-dimensional Controlled Variable Selectioncited by 121
- 2022Algorithms to estimate Shapley value feature attributionscited by 115
- 2020Causal Shapley Values: Exploiting Causal Knowledge to Explain Individual Predictions of Complex Modelscited by 107
- 2021Discussion on "Bayesian Regression Tree Models for Causal Inference: Regularization, Confounding, and Heterogeneous Effects" by Hahn, Murray and Carvalhocited by 77
- 2019Estimating Treatment Effects with Causal Forests: An Applicationcited by 58
- 2017Some methods for heterogeneous treatment effect estimation in high-dimensionscited by 48
- 2024shapiq: Shapley Interactions for Machine Learningcited by 43
- 2024Applied Causal Inference Powered by ML and AIcited by 30
- 2016Model-based Recursive Partitioning for Subgroup Analysescited by 22
- 2019Experimental Evaluation of Individualized Treatment Rulescited by 16
- 2022Variable importance measures for heterogeneous treatment effectscited by 10
- 2017Random Forests of Interaction Trees for Estimating Individualized Treatment Effects in Randomized Trialscited by 5
- 2020Cross-Fitting and Averaging for Machine Learning Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effectscited by 5
- 2023Modern approaches for evaluating treatment effect heterogeneity from clinical trials and observational datacited by 4
- 2020Knockoff Boosted Tree for Model-Free Variable Selectioncited by 3
- 2025Distilling heterogeneous treatment effects: Stable subgroup estimation in causal inferencecited by 3
- 2024LLpowershap: Logistic Loss-based Automated Shapley Values Feature Selection Methodcited by 2
- 2025Using Individualized Treatment Effects to Assess Treatment Effect Heterogeneitycited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.