# Target-confidence Recourse Using tSeTlin machines: TRUST

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.18832 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.18832/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 25 of its 33 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07697/) (2019)
- [Actionable Recourse in Linear Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.06514/) (2018)
- [FACE: Feasible and Actionable Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.09369/) (2019)
- [Learning Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Tabular Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.09398/) (2019)
- [Towards Realistic Individual Recourse and Actionable Explanations in Black-Box Decision Making Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.09615/) (2019)
- [Counterfactual Explanations Can Be Manipulated](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.02666/) (2021)
- [Bayesian Optimization with Unknown Constraints](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1403.5607/) (2014)
- [Towards Robust and Reliable Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.13620/) (2021)
- [Getting a CLUE: A Method for Explaining Uncertainty Estimates](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.06848/) (2020)
- [CARLA: A Python Library to Benchmark Algorithmic Recourse and Counterfactual Explanation Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.00783/) (2021)
- [Interpretable Predictions of Tree-based Ensembles via Actionable Feature Tweaking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.06691/) (2017)
- [The Tsetlin Machine -- A Game Theoretic Bandit Driven Approach to Optimal Pattern Recognition with Propositional Logic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.01508/) (2018)
- [On the Adversarial Robustness of Causal Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.11313/) (2021)
- [Exploring Counterfactual Explanations Through the Lens of Adversarial Examples: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09992/) (2021)
- [Robust Counterfactual Explanations for Tree-Based Ensembles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.02739/) (2022)
- [Robust Counterfactual Explanations for Neural Networks With Probabilistic Guarantees](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11997/) (2023)
- [FOCUS: Flexible Optimizable Counterfactual Explanations for Tree Ensembles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.12199/) (2019)
- [Evaluating Robustness of Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.02354/) (2021)
- [Probabilistically Robust Recourse: Navigating the Trade-offs between Costs and Robustness in Algorithmic Recourse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.06768/) (2022)
- [Formalising the Robustness of Counterfactual Explanations for Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.14878/) (2022)
- [Extending the Tsetlin Machine With Integer-Weighted Clauses for Increased Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.05131/) (2020)
- [Recourse under Model Multiplicity via Argumentative Ensembling (Technical Report)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.15097/) (2023)
- [ETHEREAL: Energy-efficient and High-throughput Inference using Compressed Tsetlin Machine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.05640/) (2025)
- [The Probabilistic Tsetlin Machine: A Novel Approach to Uncertainty Quantification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.17851/) (2024)
- [Dynamic Tsetlin Machine Accelerators for On-Chip Training at the Edge using FPGAs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19797/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Counterfactual explanations are widely used to provide algorithmic recourse in high-stakes decision-making systems. Most existing methods seek the smallest change to an input that flips a model's decision. However, decision-makers often rely not only on predicted labels but also on confidence thresholds and risk margins. Counterfactuals that barely cross a decision boundary can be fragile and unstable under noise or model variation. In this paper, we propose Target-confidence Recourse Using tSeTlin machines (TRUST), a framework in which users explicitly specify the desired prediction confidence for recourse. Rather than generating counterfactuals and evaluating confidence afterward, TRUST directly searches for minimal changes that satisfy a user-defined confidence target, enabling comparison of recourse options in terms of cost, confidence, and robustness. We instantiate TRUST using a Probabilistic Tsetlin Machine (PTM) combined with Bayesian optimization. The probabilistic clause-based structure of PTM links prediction confidence to the stability of decision rules. We show that counterfactuals satisfying the same rules can still differ substantially in reliability depending on how securely they satisfy those rules, revealing whether decisions are supported by robust or fragile clause activations. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that target-confidence counterfactuals produce more robust and interpretable recourse than conventional boundary-based approaches. Across multiple benchmarks, TRUST achieves perfect robustness while maintaining low recourse cost, including an L2 distance of 0.10 on the Haberman dataset at 0.92 confidence. By explicitly controlling confidence and exposing rule-level stability, TRUST provides actionable recourse for high-stakes decision support.