Counterfactual Explanations for Deep Two-Sample Testing

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.04009v1
• Date: Fri, 29 May 2026 14:17:08 GMT
• Title: Counterfactual Explanations for Deep Two-Sample Testing
• Abstract summary: Two-sample testing is a fundamental tool for detecting distributional differences across scientific domains.<n>Recent deep two-sample tests improve sensitivity in these settings by learning informative representations.<n>We propose a counterfactual explanation framework for deep two-sample testing.
• Score: 6.491513951159988
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Two-sample testing is a fundamental tool for detecting distributional differences across scientific domains, but classical tests (including kernel-based tests) can be ineffective on high-dimensional structured data such as images. Recent deep two-sample tests improve sensitivity in these settings by learning informative representations, yet they provide limited insight into which data features drive rejection of the null hypothesis $H_0$. To address this issue, we propose a counterfactual explanation framework for deep two-sample testing that generates sample-level edits moving observations from a source group toward a target group while explicitly reducing the discrepancy measured by the test. Our method combines a diffusion autoencoder with a pretrained deep two-sample test model and optimizes a maximum mean discrepancy (MMD) objective in the test model's representation space to produce plausible counterfactuals. We quantify distribution-level effects through changes in the test statistic and the resulting two-sample p-values. We evaluate the method on synthetic 2D shape datasets and two MRI cohorts. Across both settings, the counterfactual transformations consistently increase p-values relative to the original samples, indicating that the edited source set becomes statistically closer to the target distribution under the test. We measure minimality using LPIPS to ensure the counterfactuals remain close to the original samples. The resulting edits provide interpretable evidence of the features associated with the detected group differences. On MRI, the localized changes are consistent with known anatomical differences between cohorts.

Related papers

• Should I Use This Synthetic Dataset for Training? How to Test with Minimal Real Data [73.19814469893088]
  Digital twins and learned world models are increasingly used to generate synthetic data that augment the scarce real datasets available for training artificial intelligence (AI) models in engineering systems.<n>This paper addresses whether training on the augmented dataset improves the true, population-level performance, while consuming as few real test data points as possible.<n>Experiments on a synthetic-data classification task, a DT-aided wireless packet-scheduling task, and a radio-map prediction task show that aeSFT identifies useful synthetic data using substantially fewer real test samples than mean-based sequential testing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T07:05:38Z)
• Zero-Flow Two-Sample Tests [47.04254380987003]
  We propose a new approach to two-sample testing for deciding whether two sets of samples are drawn from the same distribution.<n>The test is built on a statistical discrepancy based on the zero-flow criterion, termed zero-flow discrepancy (ZFD)<n>We prove the validity of ZFD and propose a practical testing procedure, termed the zero-flow two-sample test (ZF2ST)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T17:27:23Z)
• A nonparametric two-sample test using a parametric integral probability metric [10.249944506187989]
  We propose a new two-sample test statistic based on a newly introduced integral probability metric (IPM)<n>We show that the resulting test statistic, called PReLU-IPM, is nonparametric and establish theoretical guarantees for the associated two-sample testing procedure, PReLU-TST.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T16:42:57Z)
• Dual Strategies for Test-Time Adaptation [37.36806938657306]
  Conventional test-time adaptation approaches typically adapt the model using only a small fraction of test samples.<n>This paper introduces DualTTA, a novel framework that improves performance under distribution shifts by utilizing a larger and more diverse set of test samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-19T17:04:36Z)
• Downstream-Pretext Domain Knowledge Traceback for Active Learning [138.02530777915362]
  We propose a downstream-pretext domain knowledge traceback (DOKT) method that traces the data interactions of downstream knowledge and pre-training guidance. DOKT consists of a traceback diversity indicator and a domain-based uncertainty estimator. Experiments conducted on ten datasets show that our model outperforms other state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T01:34:13Z)
• Domain Adaptive Synapse Detection with Weak Point Annotations [63.97144211520869]
  We present AdaSyn, a framework for domain adaptive synapse detection with weak point annotations. In the WASPSYN challenge at I SBI 2023, our method ranks the 1st place.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-31T05:05:53Z)
• Detecting Adversarial Data by Probing Multiple Perturbations Using Expected Perturbation Score [62.54911162109439]
  Adversarial detection aims to determine whether a given sample is an adversarial one based on the discrepancy between natural and adversarial distributions. We propose a new statistic called expected perturbation score (EPS), which is essentially the expected score of a sample after various perturbations. We develop EPS-based maximum mean discrepancy (MMD) as a metric to measure the discrepancy between the test sample and natural samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-25T13:14:58Z)
• Revisiting the Evaluation of Image Synthesis with GANs [55.72247435112475]
  This study presents an empirical investigation into the evaluation of synthesis performance, with generative adversarial networks (GANs) as a representative of generative models. In particular, we make in-depth analyses of various factors, including how to represent a data point in the representation space, how to calculate a fair distance using selected samples, and how many instances to use from each set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-04T17:54:32Z)
• Active Sequential Two-Sample Testing [18.99517340397671]
  We consider the two-sample testing problem in a new scenario where sample measurements are inexpensive to access. We devise the first emphactiveNIST-sample testing framework that not only sequentially but also emphactively queries. In practice, we introduce an instantiation of our framework and evaluate it using several experiments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-30T02:23:49Z)
• Spectral Regularized Kernel Two-Sample Tests [7.915420897195129]
  We show the popular MMD (maximum mean discrepancy) two-sample test to be not optimal in terms of the separation boundary measured in Hellinger distance. We propose a modification to the MMD test based on spectral regularization and prove the proposed test to be minimax optimal with a smaller separation boundary than that achieved by the MMD test. Our results hold for the permutation variant of the test where the test threshold is chosen elegantly through the permutation of the samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T00:42:21Z)
• Two-Sample Testing on Ranked Preference Data and the Role of Modeling Assumptions [57.77347280992548]
  In this paper, we design two-sample tests for pairwise comparison data and ranking data. Our test requires essentially no assumptions on the distributions. By applying our two-sample test on real-world pairwise comparison data, we conclude that ratings and rankings provided by people are indeed distributed differently.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-21T20:51:09Z)

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.