A Unified Framework for Provably Efficient Algorithms to Estimate Shapley Values
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Shapley values have emerged as a critical tool for explaining which features impact the decisions made by machine learning models. However, computing exact Shapley values is difficult, generally requiring an exponential (in the feature dimension) number of model evaluations. To address this, many model-agnostic randomized estimators have been developed, the most influential and widely used being the KernelSHAP method (Lundberg & Lee, 2017). While related estimators such as unbiased KernelSHAP (Covert & Lee, 2021) and LeverageSHAP (Musco & Witter, 2025) are known to satisfy theoretical guarantees, bounds for KernelSHAP have remained elusive. We describe a broad and unified framework that encompasses KernelSHAP and related estimators constructed using both with and without replacement sampling strategies. We then prove strong non-asymptotic theoretical guarantees that apply to all estimators from our framework. This provides, to the best of our knowledge, the first theoretical guarantees for KernelSHAP and sheds further light on tradeoffs between existing estimators. Through comprehensive benchmarking on small and medium dimensional datasets for Decision-Tree models, we validate our approach against exact Shapley values, consistently achieving low mean squared error with modest sample sizes. Furthermore, we make specific implementation improvements to enable scalability of our methods to high-dimensional datasets. Our methods, tested on datasets such MNIST and CIFAR10, provide consistently better results compared to the KernelSHAP library.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jun 2025.
Builds on
21 of 31 references.
References · 21
- 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
- 2015An Introduction to Matrix Concentration Inequalitiescited by 397
- 2014Sketching as a Tool for Numerical Linear Algebracited by 288
- 2018Consistent Individualized Feature Attribution for Tree Ensemblescited by 285
- 2019Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to Shapley valuescited by 208
- 2020Improving KernelSHAP: Practical Shapley Value Estimation via Linear Regressioncited by 154
- 2021FastSHAP: Real-Time Shapley Value Estimationcited by 125
- 2021Sampling Permutations for Shapley Value Estimationcited by 102
- 2018L-Shapley and C-Shapley: Efficient Model Interpretation for Structured Datacited by 100
- 2020Shapley explainability on the data manifoldcited by 88
9 more
- 2018A quantum-inspired classical algorithm for recommendation systemscited by 70
- 2020Efficient nonparametric statistical inference on population feature importance using Shapley valuescited by 61
- 2020Determinantal Point Processes in Randomized Numerical Linear Algebracited by 41
- 2022WeightedSHAP: analyzing and improving Shapley based feature attributionscited by 36
- 2020A Multilinear Sampling Algorithm to Estimate Shapley Valuescited by 33
- 2024Provably Accurate Shapley Value Estimation via Leverage Score Samplingcited by 23
- 2024KernelSHAP-IQ: Weighted Least-Square Optimization for Shapley Interactionscited by 22
- 2023SHAP@k:Efficient and Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) Identification of Top-k Featurescited by 5
- 2023Fast Shapley Value Estimation: A Unified Approachcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
4 papers.
- 2025Regression-adjusted Monte Carlo Estimators for Shapley Values and Probabilistic Valuescited by 19
- 2026Adalina: Adaptive Linear Approximation for the Shapley Value and Beyondcited by 1
- 2026Do covariates explain why these groups differ? The choice of reference group can reverse conclusions in the Oaxaca-Blinder decompositioncited by 0
- 2026α-TCAV: A Unified Framework for Testing with Concept Activation Vectorscited by 0
- 2026α-TCAV: A Unified Framework for Testing with Concept Activation Vectors15 May 2026
- 2026Adalina: Adaptive Linear Approximation for the Shapley Value and Beyond9 Apr 2026
- 2026Do covariates explain why these groups differ? The choice of reference group can reverse conclusions in the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition31 Mar 2026
- 2025Regression-adjusted Monte Carlo Estimators for Shapley Values and Probabilistic Values13 Jun 2025