# Adaptive Group-Based Counterfactual Explanations for Time-Series Rehabilitation Data

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01838 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.01838/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 18 of its 37 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Jul 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- [Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.00399/) (2017)
- [Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07697/) (2019)
- [All Models are Wrong, but Many are Useful: Learning a Variable's Importance by Studying an Entire Class of Prediction Models Simultaneously](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.01489/) (2018)
- [Time Series Classification from Scratch with Deep Neural Networks: A Strong Baseline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.06455/) (2016)
- [The many Shapley values for model explanation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.08474/) (2019)
- [Algorithmic Recourse: from Counterfactual Explanations to Interventions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.06278/) (2020)
- [Explaining by Removing: A Unified Framework for Model Explanation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.14878/) (2020)
- [Counterfactual Explanations and Algorithmic Recourses for Machine Learning: A Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.10596/) (2020)
- [Learning Model-Agnostic Counterfactual Explanations for Tabular Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.09398/) (2019)
- [Preserving Causal Constraints in Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning Classifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.03277/) (2019)
- [Interpretable Deep Learning: Interpretation, Interpretability, Trustworthiness, and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.10689/) (2021)
- [Instance-based Counterfactual Explanations for Time Series Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.13211/) (2020)
- [Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning on Multivariate Time Series Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.10781/) (2020)
- [Conditional Generative Models for Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.10123/) (2021)
- [M-CELS: Counterfactual Explanation for Multivariate Time Series Data Guided by Learned Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.02649/) (2024)
- [Shapelet-based Model-agnostic Counterfactual Local Explanations for Time Series Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01343/) (2024)
- [Data-Driven Discovery of Feature Groups in Clinical Time Series](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.08260/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Counterfactual explanations (CEs) for multivariate time-series classifiers are often difficult to interpret in domains where experts reason in terms of semantic feature groups rather than individual channels. In rehabilitation movement analysis with multi-sensor inertial measurement units (IMUs), clinicians interpret motion through muscle-group and joint-segment abstractions; yet, most existing counterfactual methods operate at the channel level, producing scattered and biomechanically incoherent explanations. We propose a two-stage framework for group-based counterfactual generation in high-dimensional IMU data. We first show that Shapley-Adaptive (SA) group ranking preserves counterfactual validity but fails to enforce group-level sparsity, motivating the need for explicit group selection. We then introduce Learnable Gate (LG) methods, which incorporate trainable per-group relevance gates jointly optimized with perturbation masks. Experiments on the KneE-PAD rehabilitation dataset demonstrate that LG substantially improves modality-group sparsity compared to the channel-level M-CELS baseline while maintaining or improving validity, temporal smoothness, and generation efficiency. Exercise-specific analyses further show that group-structured counterfactuals yield concise, muscle-level corrective guidance aligned with clinical reasoning. Overall, the proposed framework enhances interpretability without sacrificing counterfactual quality, enabling more actionable explanations for rehabilitation movement analysis.