Explaining the Model and Feature Dependencies by Decomposition of the Shapley Value

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2306.10880v1
• Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2023 12:20:23 GMT
• Title: Explaining the Model and Feature Dependencies by Decomposition of the Shapley Value
• Authors: Joran Michiels, Maarten De Vos, Johan Suykens
• Abstract summary: Shapley values have become one of the go-to methods to explain complex models to end-users. One downside is that they always require outputs of the model when some features are missing. This however introduces a non-trivial choice: do we condition on the unknown features or not? We propose a new algorithmic approach to combine both explanations, removing the burden of choice and enhancing the explanatory power of Shapley values.
• Score: 3.0655581300025996
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Shapley values have become one of the go-to methods to explain complex models to end-users. They provide a model agnostic post-hoc explanation with foundations in game theory: what is the worth of a player (in machine learning, a feature value) in the objective function (the output of the complex machine learning model). One downside is that they always require outputs of the model when some features are missing. These are usually computed by taking the expectation over the missing features. This however introduces a non-trivial choice: do we condition on the unknown features or not? In this paper we examine this question and claim that they represent two different explanations which are valid for different end-users: one that explains the model and one that explains the model combined with the feature dependencies in the data. We propose a new algorithmic approach to combine both explanations, removing the burden of choice and enhancing the explanatory power of Shapley values, and show that it achieves intuitive results on simple problems. We apply our method to two real-world datasets and discuss the explanations. Finally, we demonstrate how our method is either equivalent or superior to state-to-of-art Shapley value implementations while simultaneously allowing for increased insight into the model-data structure.

Related papers

• Learning with Explanation Constraints [91.23736536228485]
  We provide a learning theoretic framework to analyze how explanations can improve the learning of our models. We demonstrate the benefits of our approach over a large array of synthetic and real-world experiments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-25T15:06:47Z)
• From Shapley Values to Generalized Additive Models and back [16.665883787432858]
  We introduce $n$-Shapley Values, a natural extension of Shapley Values that explain individual predictions with interaction terms up to order $n$. From the Shapley-GAM, we can compute Shapley Values of arbitrary order, which gives precise insights into the limitations of these explanations. At the technical end, we show that there is a one-to-one correspondence between different ways to choose the value function and different functional decompositions of the original function.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-08T19:37:06Z)
• ELUDE: Generating interpretable explanations via a decomposition into labelled and unlabelled features [23.384134043048807]
  We develop an explanation framework that decomposes a model's prediction into two parts. By identifying the latter, we are able to analyze the "unexplained" portion of the model. We show that the set of unlabelled features can generalize to multiple models trained with the same feature space.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-15T17:36:55Z)
• Is Shapley Explanation for a model unique? [0.0]
  We explore the relationship between the distribution of a feature and its Shapley value. Our assessment is that Shapley value for particular feature not only depends on its expected mean but on other moments as well such as variance. It varies with model outcome (Probability/Log-odds/binary decision such as accept vs reject) and hence model application.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-23T15:31:46Z)
• Model-agnostic multi-objective approach for the evolutionary discovery of mathematical models [55.41644538483948]
  In modern data science, it is more interesting to understand the properties of the model, which parts could be replaced to obtain better results. We use multi-objective evolutionary optimization for composite data-driven model learning to obtain the algorithm's desired properties.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-07T11:17:09Z)
• Search Methods for Sufficient, Socially-Aligned Feature Importance Explanations with In-Distribution Counterfactuals [72.00815192668193]
  Feature importance (FI) estimates are a popular form of explanation, and they are commonly created and evaluated by computing the change in model confidence caused by removing certain input features at test time. We study several under-explored dimensions of FI-based explanations, providing conceptual and empirical improvements for this form of explanation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-01T20:36:48Z)
• Beyond Trivial Counterfactual Explanations with Diverse Valuable Explanations [64.85696493596821]
  In computer vision applications, generative counterfactual methods indicate how to perturb a model's input to change its prediction. We propose a counterfactual method that learns a perturbation in a disentangled latent space that is constrained using a diversity-enforcing loss. Our model improves the success rate of producing high-quality valuable explanations when compared to previous state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-18T12:57:34Z)
• Contrastive Explanations for Model Interpretability [77.92370750072831]
  We propose a methodology to produce contrastive explanations for classification models. Our method is based on projecting model representation to a latent space. Our findings shed light on the ability of label-contrastive explanations to provide a more accurate and finer-grained interpretability of a model's decision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-02T00:36:45Z)
• Dependency Decomposition and a Reject Option for Explainable Models [4.94950858749529]
  Recent deep learning models perform extremely well in various inference tasks. Recent advances offer methods to visualize features, describe attribution of the input. We present the first analysis of dependencies regarding the probability distribution over the desired image classification outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-11T17:39:33Z)
• The Struggles of Feature-Based Explanations: Shapley Values vs. Minimal Sufficient Subsets [61.66584140190247]
  We show that feature-based explanations pose problems even for explaining trivial models. We show that two popular classes of explainers, Shapley explainers and minimal sufficient subsets explainers, target fundamentally different types of ground-truth explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-23T09:45:23Z)
• Explaining predictive models with mixed features using Shapley values and conditional inference trees [1.8065361710947976]
  Shapley values stand out as a sound method to explain predictions from any type of machine learning model. We propose a method to explain mixed dependent features by modeling the dependence structure of the features using conditional inference trees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-02T11:25:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.