Sufficient Explanations in Databases and their Connections to Necessary Explanations and Repairs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.15623v1
• Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:07:16 GMT
• Title: Sufficient Explanations in Databases and their Connections to Necessary Explanations and Repairs
• Authors: Leopoldo Bertossi, Nina Pardal,
• Abstract summary: We consider the alternative notion of sufficient explanation.<n>We investigate its connections with database repairs as used for dealing with inconsistent databases, and with causality-based necessary explanations.
• Score: 0.7734726150561088
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The notion of cause, as formalized by Halpern and Pearl, has been recently applied to relational databases, to characterize and compute causal explanations for query answers. In this work we consider the alternative notion of sufficient explanation. We investigate its connections with database repairs as used for dealing with inconsistent databases, and with causality-based necessary explanations. We also obtain some computational results.

Related papers

• Causal Graph based Event Reasoning using Semantic Relation Experts [56.328115024900725]
  We investigate the generation of causal event graphs as a parallel mechanism to help Large Language Models (LLMs) explicitly represent causality during inference.<n>We propose a collaborative approach to causal graph generation where we use LLMs to simulate experts that focus on specific semantic relations.<n>We also introduce a new explainable event prediction task that requires a causal chain of events in the explanation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-07T20:15:45Z)
• Are We Merely Justifying Results ex Post Facto? Quantifying Explanatory Inversion in Post-Hoc Model Explanations [87.68633031231924]
  Post-hoc explanation methods provide interpretation by attributing predictions to input features.<n>Do these explanations unintentionally reverse the natural relationship between inputs and outputs?<n>We propose Inversion Quantification (IQ), a framework that quantifies the degree to which explanations rely on outputs and deviate from faithful input-output relationships.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T19:00:12Z)
• New Rules for Causal Identification with Background Knowledge [59.733125324672656]
  We propose two novel rules for incorporating BK, which offer a new perspective to the open problem. We show that these rules are applicable in some typical causality tasks, such as determining the set of possible causal effects with observational data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-21T20:21:21Z)
• Attribution-Scores in Data Management and Explainable Machine Learning [0.0]
  We describe recent research on the use of actual causality in the definition of responsibility scores in databases. In the case of databases, useful connections with database repairs are illustrated and exploited. For classification models, the responsibility score is properly extended and illustrated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-31T22:41:17Z)
• From Database Repairs to Causality in Databases and Beyond [0.0]
  We describe some recent approaches to score-based explanations for query answers in databases. Special emphasis is placed on the use of counterfactual reasoning for score specification and computation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T04:08:23Z)
• Advancing Counterfactual Inference through Nonlinear Quantile Regression [77.28323341329461]
  We propose a framework for efficient and effective counterfactual inference implemented with neural networks. The proposed approach enhances the capacity to generalize estimated counterfactual outcomes to unseen data. Empirical results conducted on multiple datasets offer compelling support for our theoretical assertions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-09T08:30:51Z)
• Rethinking Complex Queries on Knowledge Graphs with Neural Link Predictors [58.340159346749964]
  We propose a new neural-symbolic method to support end-to-end learning using complex queries with provable reasoning capability. We develop a new dataset containing ten new types of queries with features that have never been considered. Our method outperforms previous methods significantly in the new dataset and also surpasses previous methods in the existing dataset at the same time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-14T11:35:35Z)
• Answer-Set Programs for Repair Updates and Counterfactual Interventions [0.0]
  We briefly describe different kinds of answer-set programs with annotations. These include database repairs and consistent query answering, secrecy view and query evaluation, and counterfactual interventions for causality in databases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-25T00:34:39Z)
• Everything Has a Cause: Leveraging Causal Inference in Legal Text Analysis [62.44432226563088]
  Causal inference is the process of capturing cause-effect relationship among variables. We propose a novel Graph-based Causal Inference framework, which builds causal graphs from fact descriptions without much human involvement. We observe that the causal knowledge contained in GCI can be effectively injected into powerful neural networks for better performance and interpretability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-19T16:13:10Z)
• Competency Problems: On Finding and Removing Artifacts in Language Data [50.09608320112584]
  We argue that for complex language understanding tasks, all simple feature correlations are spurious. We theoretically analyze the difficulty of creating data for competency problems when human bias is taken into account.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-17T21:34:10Z)
• Score-Based Explanations in Data Management and Machine Learning [0.0]
  We consider explanations for query answers in databases, and for results from classification models. The described approaches are mostly of a causal and counterfactual nature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-24T23:13:27Z)
• Querying and Repairing Inconsistent Prioritized Knowledge Bases: Complexity Analysis and Links with Abstract Argumentation [5.87010466783654]
  We study the issue of inconsistency over prioritized knowledge bases (KBs) We propose a novel semantics for prioritized KBs inspired by grounded extensions and enjoys favourable properties. Our study also yields some results of independent interest concerning preference-based argumentation frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-12T12:38:37Z)

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.