Exact Shapley Attributions in Quadratic-time for FANOVA Gaussian Processes
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Shapley values are widely recognized as a principled method for attributing importance to input features in machine learning. However, the exact computation of Shapley values scales exponentially with the number of features, severely limiting the practical application of this powerful approach. The challenge is further compounded when the predictive model is probabilistic - as in Gaussian processes (GPs) - where the outputs are random variables rather than point estimates, necessitating additional computational effort in modeling higher-order moments. In this work, we demonstrate that for an important class of GPs known as FANOVA GP, which explicitly models all main effects and interactions, *exact* Shapley attributions for both local and global explanations can be computed in *quadratic time*. For local, instance-wise explanations, we define a stochastic cooperative game over function components and compute the exact stochastic Shapley value in quadratic time only, capturing both the expected contribution and uncertainty. For global explanations, we introduce a deterministic, variance-based value function and compute exact Shapley values that quantify each feature's contribution to the model's overall sensitivity. Our methods leverage a closed-form (stochastic) M"obius representation of the FANOVA decomposition and introduce recursive algorithms, inspired by Newton's identities, to efficiently compute the mean and variance of Shapley values. Our work enhances the utility of explainable AI, as demonstrated by empirical studies, by providing more scalable, axiomatically sound, and uncertainty-aware explanations for predictions generated by structured probabilistic models.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2025.
Builds on
13 of 30 references.
References · 13
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2020Improving KernelSHAP: Practical Shapley Value Estimation via Linear Regressioncited by 154
- 2018Model Agnostic Supervised Local Explanationscited by 83
- 2015A Review of Feature Selection Methods Based on Mutual Informationcited by 67
- 2021RKHS-SHAP: Shapley Values for Kernel Methodscited by 30
- 2023Looping in the Human Collaborative and Explainable Bayesian Optimizationcited by 27
- 2021Deconditional Downscaling with Gaussian Processescited by 24
- 2021BayesIMP: Uncertainty Quantification for Causal Data Fusioncited by 21
- 2023Explaining the Uncertain: Stochastic Shapley Values for Gaussian Process Modelscited by 19
- 2023Explanations of Black-Box Models based on Directional Feature Interactionscited by 15
- 2024Unifying Feature-Based Explanations with Functional ANOVA and Cooperative Game Theorycited by 10
1 more
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 4.
6 papers.
- 2026An Odd Estimator for Shapley Valuescited by 5
- 2026Beyond Prediction-Set Size: Quantifying Conformal Uncertainty through Credal Geometrycited by 4
- 2026Exactly Computing do-Shapley Valuescited by 3
- 2025Tractable Shapley Values and Interactions via Tensor Networkscited by 2
- 2025When Do Credal Sets Stabilize? Fixed-Point Theorems for Credal Set Updatescited by 1
- 2026ShaplEIG: Bayesian Experimental Design for Shapley Value Estimationcited by 0
- 2026ShaplEIG: Bayesian Experimental Design for Shapley Value Estimation1 Jun 2026
- 2026Exactly Computing do-Shapley Values6 Feb 2026
- 2026Beyond Prediction-Set Size: Quantifying Conformal Uncertainty through Credal Geometry2 Feb 2026
- 2026An Odd Estimator for Shapley Values1 Feb 2026
- 2025Tractable Shapley Values and Interactions via Tensor Networks25 Oct 2025
- 2025When Do Credal Sets Stabilize? Fixed-Point Theorems for Credal Set Updates6 Oct 2025