The Failures of Marginal Influence-Based Attribution Methods for Global Time Series Explanations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Explainability methods for time series models predominantly produce flat attribution scores: they quantify the direct influence of a feature at a timestamp by a scalar. We prove that the dominant failure mode of such methods is not the scalar format itself but a fundamental computational mismatch: existing methods compute scores via marginal conditioning or off-manifold gradients, both of which conflate direct temporal dependencies with mediated ones under autocorrelation. We also define DAG-faithfulness: an explanation is DAG-faithful if the temporal dependency graph it encodes is Markov-equivalent to the temporal directed acyclic graph (DAG) implicitly learned by the model. Particularly, we observe that standard attribution methods, specifically SHAP, are not DAG-faithful in general, and that recent time-series-aware extensions inherit the same computational limitation.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Jun 2026.
Builds on
20 of 30 references.
References · 20
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
- 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
- 2020Quantifying Attention Flow in Transformerscited by 759
- 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
- 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 590
- 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
- 2021Causal Abstractions of Neural Networkscited by 401
- 2017The (Un)reliability of saliency methodscited by 331
8 more
- 2019Counterfactual Visual Explanationscited by 312
- 2018On the Robustness of Interpretability Methodscited by 310
- 2020DYNOTEARS: Structure Learning from Time-Series Datacited by 198
- 2020Discovering contemporaneous and lagged causal relations in autocorrelated nonlinear time series datasetscited by 136
- 2020TimeSHAP: Explaining Recurrent Models through Sequence Perturbationscited by 73
- 2021Explaining Time Series Predictions with Dynamic Maskscited by 72
- 2022Rhino: Deep Causal Temporal Relationship Learning With History-dependent Noisecited by 30
- 2021Temporal Dependencies in Feature Importance for Time Series Predictionscited by 27
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.