Summary of Counterfactual Explainability Of Black-box Prediction Models, by Zijun Gao and Qingyuan Zhao
Counterfactual explainability of black-box prediction models
by Zijun Gao, Qingyuan Zhao
First submitted to arxiv on: 3 Nov 2024
Categories
- Main: Machine Learning (stat.ML)
- Secondary: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
GrooveSquid.com Paper Summaries
GrooveSquid.com’s goal is to make artificial intelligence research accessible by summarizing AI papers in simpler terms. Each summary below covers the same AI paper, written at different levels of difficulty. The medium difficulty and low difficulty versions are original summaries written by GrooveSquid.com, while the high difficulty version is the paper’s original abstract. Feel free to learn from the version that suits you best!
| Summary difficulty | Written by | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| High | Paper authors | High Difficulty Summary Read the original abstract here |
| Medium | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Medium Difficulty Summary The proposed paper addresses the need for effective and safe use of black-box prediction models in practice. Existing tools for model explanations are often associational rather than causal, which is inadequate. The authors introduce counterfactual explainability, a new notion that leverages counterfactual outcomes and extends methods from global sensitivity analysis to a causal setting. This approach has three key advantages: it accounts for interactions between input factors, applies to dependent input factors modeled by directed acyclic graphs, and provides a probability measure on the explanation algebra. The paper’s findings have significant implications for understanding and interpreting black-box prediction models. |
| Low | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Low Difficulty Summary The paper wants to make sure we can understand how computer programs called “black-box” prediction models work so they can be used safely and effectively. Right now, most tools that try to explain these models aren’t very good because they just show what’s related, not why it happened. The authors have a new idea called counterfactual explainability that helps us see the causes behind the predictions. This approach is special because it looks at how different things work together and also takes into account when some things depend on others. |
Keywords
» Artificial intelligence » Probability
