# Null importance: Disentangling relevance for interpretable machine learning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.19511 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.19511/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 38 of its 86 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 38)

- [Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02391/) (2016)
- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.01365/) (2017)
- [Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6034/) (2013)
- [Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02413/) (2016)
- [A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.09635/) (2019)
- [Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.02685/) (2017)
- [Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.08600/) (2023)
- [Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08608/) (2017)
- [Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.07269/) (2017)
- [Sanity Checks for Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.03292/) (2018)
- [SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noise](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03825/) (2017)
- [A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.01933/) (2018)
- [Counterfactual Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.06856/) (2017)
- [Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.07524/) (2016)
- [Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1604.04173/) (2016)
- [Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.05807/) (2016)
- [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)
- [Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.04053/) (2020)
- [Interpretable machine learning: definitions, methods, and applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.04592/) (2019)
- [Consistent Individualized Feature Attribution for Tree Ensembles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.03888/) (2018)
- [Visualizing the Effects of Predictor Variables in Black Box Supervised Learning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.08468/) (2016)
- [Avoiding Discrimination through Causal Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.02744/) (2017)
- [Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.29358/) (2026)
- [Feature relevance quantification in explainable AI: A causal problem](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.13413/) (2019)
- [Improving KernelSHAP: Practical Shapley Value Estimation via Linear Regression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.01536/) (2020)
- [CausalGAN: Learning Causal Implicit Generative Models with Adversarial Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.02023/) (2017)
- [Panning for Gold: Model-X Knockoffs for High-dimensional Controlled Variable Selection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02351/) (2016)
- [Causal Shapley Values: Exploiting Causal Knowledge to Explain Individual Predictions of Complex Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.01625/) (2020)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Feature importance is central to interpretable machine learning, but the term "importance" encompasses several fundamentally different notions of relevance. We develop a unified perspective based on null importance: a population-level characterization of when a feature is irrelevant under a specified notion of relevance. We consider standard notions of null importance arising from marginal and conditional statistical relevance, predictive risk, functional invariance, and causal effects, and show how these notions answer different scientific questions. We illustrate the framework in two applications in which the distinction is particularly consequential: algorithmic fairness, where common fairness criteria correspond to different notions of null importance, and genomic perturbation modeling, where different notions of relevance lead to different conclusions about what a prediction model has learned. The framework connects three aspects of feature analysis: the scientific question defining relevance, the data and model assumptions that shape how different null notions relate, and the methods used to assess importance. We establish sufficient conditions under which null notions coincide and give counterexamples showing how they diverge when those conditions fail. We then characterize which nulls different method families target and when their zero-importance statistics identify those targets. Finally, simulations spanning feature dependence, redundancy, nonlinearity, hidden features and other standard phenomena, along with case studies on image and multiomics data, provide empirical evidence for these theoretical distinctions and their practical consequences. Taken together, these results provide a common statistical language for relating scientific questions, data-generating assumptions, and algorithms, and clarify the conclusions that feature-importance analyses can support.