Generating Feasible and Plausible Counterfactual Explanations for Outcome Prediction of Business Processes

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.09232v1
• Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 09:56:35 GMT
• Title: Generating Feasible and Plausible Counterfactual Explanations for Outcome Prediction of Business Processes
• Authors: Alexander Stevens, Chun Ouyang, Johannes De Smedt, Catarina Moreira,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a data-driven approach, REVISEDplus, to generate plausible counterfactual explanations. First, we restrict the counterfactual algorithm to generate counterfactuals that lie within a high-density region of the process data. We also ensure plausibility by learning sequential patterns between the activities in the process cases.
• Score: 45.502284864662585
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In recent years, various machine and deep learning architectures have been successfully introduced to the field of predictive process analytics. Nevertheless, the inherent opacity of these algorithms poses a significant challenge for human decision-makers, hindering their ability to understand the reasoning behind the predictions. This growing concern has sparked the introduction of counterfactual explanations, designed as human-understandable what if scenarios, to provide clearer insights into the decision-making process behind undesirable predictions. The generation of counterfactual explanations, however, encounters specific challenges when dealing with the sequential nature of the (business) process cases typically used in predictive process analytics. Our paper tackles this challenge by introducing a data-driven approach, REVISEDplus, to generate more feasible and plausible counterfactual explanations. First, we restrict the counterfactual algorithm to generate counterfactuals that lie within a high-density region of the process data, ensuring that the proposed counterfactuals are realistic and feasible within the observed process data distribution. Additionally, we ensure plausibility by learning sequential patterns between the activities in the process cases, utilising Declare language templates. Finally, we evaluate the properties that define the validity of counterfactuals.

Related papers

• Quantification of Predictive Uncertainty via Inference-Time Sampling [57.749601811982096]
  We propose a post-hoc sampling strategy for estimating predictive uncertainty accounting for data ambiguity. The method can generate different plausible outputs for a given input and does not assume parametric forms of predictive distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-03T12:43:21Z)
• Quantifying and Explaining Machine Learning Uncertainty in Predictive Process Monitoring: An Operations Research Perspective [0.0]
  This paper introduces a comprehensive, multi-stage machine learning methodology that integrates information systems and artificial intelligence. The proposed framework adeptly addresses common limitations of existing solutions, such as the neglect of data-driven estimation. Our approach employs Quantile Regression Forests for generating interval predictions, alongside both local and global variants of SHapley Additive Explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-13T11:18:22Z)
• Explainability in Process Outcome Prediction: Guidelines to Obtain Interpretable and Faithful Models [77.34726150561087]
  We define explainability through the interpretability of the explanations and the faithfulness of the explainability model in the field of process outcome prediction. This paper contributes a set of guidelines named X-MOP which allows selecting the appropriate model based on the event log specifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-30T05:59:50Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations for Predictive Business Process Monitoring [0.90238471756546]
  We propose LORELEY, a counterfactual explanation technique for predictive process monitoring. LORELEY can approximate prediction models with an average fidelity of 97.69% and generate realistic counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-24T11:01:20Z)
• Interpreting Process Predictions using a Milestone-Aware Counterfactual Approach [0.0]
  We explore the use of a popular model-agnostic counterfactual algorithm, DiCE, in the context of predictive process analytics. The analysis reveals that the algorithm is limited when being applied to derive explanations of process predictions. We propose an approach that supports deriving milestone-aware counterfactuals at different stages of a trace to promote interpretability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-19T09:14:16Z)
• Explainable AI Enabled Inspection of Business Process Prediction Models [2.5229940062544496]
  We present an approach that allows us to use model explanations to investigate certain reasoning applied by machine learned predictions. A novel contribution of our approach is the proposal of model inspection that leverages both the explanations generated by interpretable machine learning mechanisms and the contextual or domain knowledge extracted from event logs that record historical process execution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-16T06:51:18Z)
• Generative Counterfactuals for Neural Networks via Attribute-Informed Perturbation [51.29486247405601]
  We design a framework to generate counterfactuals for raw data instances with the proposed Attribute-Informed Perturbation (AIP) By utilizing generative models conditioned with different attributes, counterfactuals with desired labels can be obtained effectively and efficiently. Experimental results on real-world texts and images demonstrate the effectiveness, sample quality as well as efficiency of our designed framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-18T08:37:13Z)
• Uncertainty as a Form of Transparency: Measuring, Communicating, and Using Uncertainty [66.17147341354577]
  We argue for considering a complementary form of transparency by estimating and communicating the uncertainty associated with model predictions. We describe how uncertainty can be used to mitigate model unfairness, augment decision-making, and build trustworthy systems. This work constitutes an interdisciplinary review drawn from literature spanning machine learning, visualization/HCI, design, decision-making, and fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-15T17:26:14Z)
• Counterfactual Predictions under Runtime Confounding [74.90756694584839]
  We study the counterfactual prediction task in the setting where all relevant factors are captured in the historical data. We propose a doubly-robust procedure for learning counterfactual prediction models in this setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-30T15:49:05Z)

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.