Analyzing Error Sources in Global Feature Effect Estimation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.15057v2
• Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:23:11 GMT
• Title: Analyzing Error Sources in Global Feature Effect Estimation
• Abstract summary: Global feature effects such as partial dependence (PD) and accumulated local effects (ALE) plots are widely used to interpret black-box models.<n>Despite the popularity of global feature effects, error sources are largely unexplored.<n>We provide a systematic, estimator-level analysis that disentangles sources of bias and variance for PD and ALE.
• Score: 11.864330844302403
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Global feature effects such as partial dependence (PD) and accumulated local effects (ALE) plots are widely used to interpret black-box models. However, they are only estimates of true underlying effects, and their reliability depends on multiple sources of error. Despite the popularity of global feature effects, these error sources are largely unexplored. In particular, the practically relevant question of whether to use training or holdout data to estimate feature effects remains unanswered. We address this gap by providing a systematic, estimator-level analysis that disentangles sources of bias and variance for PD and ALE. To this end, we derive a mean-squared-error decomposition that separates model bias, estimation bias, model variance, and estimation variance, and analyze their dependence on model characteristics, data selection, and sample size. We validate our theoretical findings through an extensive simulation study across multiple data-generating processes, learners, estimation strategies (training data, validation data, and cross-validation), and sample sizes. Our results reveal that, while using holdout data is theoretically the cleanest, potential biases arising from the training data are empirically negligible and dominated by the impact of the usually higher sample size. The estimation variance depends on both the presence of interactions and the sample size, with ALE being particularly sensitive to the latter. Cross-validation-based estimation is a promising approach that reduces the model variance component, particularly for overfitting models. Our analysis provides a principled explanation of the sources of error in feature effect estimates and offers concrete guidance on choosing estimation strategies when interpreting machine learning models.

Related papers

• Proxy-Guided Measurement Calibration [7.842603902533572]
  We study the problem of outcome miscalibration and propose a framework guided by proxy variables for estimating and correcting the systematic errors.<n>We model the data-generating process using a causal graph that separates latent content variables driving the true outcome from the latent bias variables that induce systematic errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-10T07:15:02Z)
• Nonparametric Data Attribution for Diffusion Models [57.820618036556084]
  Data attribution for generative models seeks to quantify the influence of individual training examples on model outputs.<n>We propose a nonparametric attribution method that operates entirely on data, measuring influence via patch-level similarity between generated and training images.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T03:37:16Z)
• Influence Functions for Scalable Data Attribution in Diffusion Models [52.92223039302037]
  Diffusion models have led to significant advancements in generative modelling.<n>Yet their widespread adoption poses challenges regarding data attribution and interpretability.<n>We develop an influence functions framework to address these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T17:59:02Z)
• The Mirrored Influence Hypothesis: Efficient Data Influence Estimation by Harnessing Forward Passes [30.30769701138665]
  We introduce and explore the Mirrored Influence Hypothesis, highlighting a reciprocal nature of influence between training and test data. Specifically, it suggests that evaluating the influence of training data on test predictions can be reformulated as an equivalent, yet inverse problem. We introduce a new method for estimating the influence of training data, which requires calculating gradients for specific test samples, paired with a forward pass for each training point.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T03:43:05Z)
• Data Attribution for Diffusion Models: Timestep-induced Bias in Influence Estimation [53.27596811146316]
  Diffusion models operate over a sequence of timesteps instead of instantaneous input-output relationships in previous contexts. We present Diffusion-TracIn that incorporates this temporal dynamics and observe that samples' loss gradient norms are highly dependent on timestep. We introduce Diffusion-ReTrac as a re-normalized adaptation that enables the retrieval of training samples more targeted to the test sample of interest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T07:58:18Z)
• Stubborn Lexical Bias in Data and Models [50.79738900885665]
  We use a new statistical method to examine whether spurious patterns in data appear in models trained on the data. We apply an optimization approach to *reweight* the training data, reducing thousands of spurious correlations. Surprisingly, though this method can successfully reduce lexical biases in the training data, we still find strong evidence of corresponding bias in the trained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-03T20:12:27Z)
• Provable Detection of Propagating Sampling Bias in Prediction Models [1.7709344190822935]
  We provide a theoretical analysis of how a specific form of data bias, differential sampling bias, propagates from the data stage to the prediction stage. Under reasonable assumptions, we quantify how the amount of bias in the model predictions varies as a function of the amount of differential sampling bias in the data. We demonstrate that the theoretical results hold in practice even when our assumptions are relaxed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-13T23:39:35Z)
• Empirical Analysis of Model Selection for Heterogeneous Causal Effect Estimation [24.65301562548798]
  We study the problem of model selection in causal inference, specifically for conditional average treatment effect (CATE) estimation. We conduct an empirical analysis to benchmark the surrogate model selection metrics introduced in the literature, as well as the novel ones introduced in this work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-03T16:26:06Z)
• Understanding Influence Functions and Datamodels via Harmonic Analysis [36.86262318584668]
  Influence functions estimate effect of individual data points on predictions of the model on test data. They have been used for detecting data poisoning, detecting helpful and harmful examples, influence of groups of datapoints, etc. Recently, Ilyas et al. [2022] introduced a linear regression method they termed datamodels to predict the effect of training points on outputs on test data. This paper seeks to provide a better theoretical understanding of such interesting empirical phenomena.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-03T16:45:33Z)
• Bias-inducing geometries: an exactly solvable data model with fairness implications [12.532003449620607]
  We introduce an exactly solvable high-dimensional model of data imbalance.<n>We analytically unpack the typical properties of learning models trained in this synthetic framework.<n>We obtain exact predictions for the observables that are commonly employed for fairness assessment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-31T16:27:57Z)
• Selecting the suitable resampling strategy for imbalanced data classification regarding dataset properties [62.997667081978825]
  In many application domains such as medicine, information retrieval, cybersecurity, social media, etc., datasets used for inducing classification models often have an unequal distribution of the instances of each class. This situation, known as imbalanced data classification, causes low predictive performance for the minority class examples. Oversampling and undersampling techniques are well-known strategies to deal with this problem by balancing the number of examples of each class.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-15T18:56:39Z)
• On the Benefits of Invariance in Neural Networks [56.362579457990094]
  We show that training with data augmentation leads to better estimates of risk and thereof gradients, and we provide a PAC-Bayes generalization bound for models trained with data augmentation. We also show that compared to data augmentation, feature averaging reduces generalization error when used with convex losses, and tightens PAC-Bayes bounds.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-01T02:08:58Z)

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.