Link to paper

The full paper is available here.

You can also find the paper on PapersWithCode here.

Abstract

  • Counterfactual explanations are important for detecting bias and improving explainability of data-driven classification models.
  • Counterfactual explanations are minimal perturbed data points that cause the model’s decision to change.
  • Existing methods can only provide one CE, which may not be achievable for the user.
  • This work provides an iterative method to calculate robust CEs that remain valid even after features are slightly perturbed.
  • The method provides a region of CEs, allowing the user to choose a suitable recourse to obtain a desired outcome.
  • The method is applicable to logistic regression, decision trees, random forests, and neural networks.
  • Experiments show the method can generate globally optimal robust CEs for a variety of data sets and classification models.

Paper Content

Introduction

  • Counterfactual explanations are a way to explain decisions made by black-box machine learning models.
  • The aim is to find a counterfactual feature combination that will lead to a flipped model prediction.
  • User agency is provided by these methods, but the generated CEs are exact point solutions that may be difficult to implement in practice.
  • Prior work suggests generating several CEs to increase the likelihood of generating an attainable solution.
  • Robustness in CEs has different meanings, including robustness to input perturbations, model changes, hyperparameter selection, or recourse.
  • Our work addresses robustness to recourse by utilizing a robust optimization approach to generate regions of CEs.
  • Our method generates a set of CEs such that every solution in this set is a valid CE.
  • Our approach is able to provide deterministic robustness guarantees for the CEs generated.
  • We propose an iterative algorithm that effectively finds optimal robust CEs for decision trees, ensembles of trees, and neural networks.
  • We prove convergence of the algorithm for the prementioned models.
  • We analyze the performance of the algorithm on several datasets.
  • We release an open-source software called RCE to make the proposed algorithm easily accessible.

Robust counterfactual explanations

  • Binary classification problems involve assigning a value between 0 and 1 to each data point in a data space.
  • A point is predicted to be in class +1 if the value is greater than or equal to a given threshold parameter, and class -1 otherwise.
  • The robust CE problem is defined as finding a point as close as possible to a factual instance such that all perturbations of the point are classified as +1.
  • Uncertainty sets are of the type where and duality is used to solve the optimization problem.

Adversarial robust approach

  • Propose to solve a model with an iterative method known as the adversarial approach
  • Consider a relaxed version of the model with a finite subset of scenarios
  • Optimal value of the relaxed version is a lower bound of the original problem
  • Solution of the relaxed version may not be feasible for the original problem
  • Find a new scenario to cut off the solution of the relaxed version
  • Maximize the constraint violation in the objective function
  • If optimal value is positive, add the scenario to the set and calculate a solution
  • Iterate until no violating scenario can be found
  • Use accuracy parameter to guarantee convergence
  • Handle the case of decision trees and tree ensembles

Linear models

  • Algorithm 1 can be used to solve linear models.
  • There is an easier and more efficient way to solve model (3)-(4).
  • Validity constraint (4) can be formulated as β ∈ R n and β 0 ∈ R.
  • These constraints can be reformulated as (7) and (8).
  • (8) is linear in x regardless of S.

Decision trees

  • Decision trees partition observations into distinct leaves through a series of feature splits
  • Each leaf has been assigned a weight
  • A Lipschitz continuous function is used to achieve convergence of the algorithm
  • The classifier is a piecewise constant function
  • The function is Lipschitz continuous except on the leaf boundaries
  • Two formulations are derived for the tree model
  • An alternative approach is proposed to find a CE which is robust only regarding to one leaf of the tree
  • Iterating over all possible leaves is suggested to solve the resulting MP
  • Auxiliary binary variables can be used to model the entire decision tree

Tree ensembles

  • Random Forest (RF) and Gradient Boosting Machines (GBM) are tree ensembles
  • Each base learner is a decision tree
  • We add constraints to the master problem for each base learner
  • We replace constraint (12) with a weight of leaf i in base learner k
  • Random Forest is equivalent to a decision tree
  • Convergence analysis from Section 2.3 applies to ensemble case

Neural networks

  • Neural networks with ReLU activation functions are Lipschitz continuous and belong to the MIP-representable class of ML models.
  • The ReLU operator of a neuron in layer l is given by a coefficient vector, bias value, and output of neuron j of layer l-1.
  • The input of the neural network can be a data point perturbed by a scenario.

Experiments

  • Aim to illustrate effectiveness of method by conducting empirical experiments
  • Experiments run on computer with Apple M1 Pro processor and 16 GB RAM
  • Open-source implementation available at GitHub
  • First approach generating region of CEs for range of different models
  • Experiments on 3 datasets: BAN-KNOTE AUTHENTICATION, DIABETES, and IONOSPHERE
  • Features scaled to be between 0 and 1
  • Algorithm used ∞-norm as uncertainty set with radius of 0.01 and 0.05
  • Time limit of 1000 seconds
  • Results in Table 1

Discussion and future work

  • Proposed robust optimization approach for generating regions of CEs for logistic regression, tree-based models, and neural networks
  • Theoretically converges and supported through empirical study
  • Generates explanations efficiently on a variety of datasets and ML models
  • Scales well with the number of features
  • Main computational challenge is solving the master problem
  • Future work includes speeding up calculations, evaluating user perception, and implementing categorical and immutable features

A. lipschitz continuity

  • Proof of Lemma 2.3 is shown by considering three cases
  • Lemma 2.3 states that h is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant L
  • Neural network constructed with ReLU activation functions can be written as a composition of linear and component-as well as piece-wise linear functions
  • Composition of two Lipschitz continuous functions is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant L h L g
  • Master problem (MP) and adversarial problem (AP) are formulated
  • Results on three datasets are reported in Table 2
  • Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5 illustrate iterations of Algorithm 1, slack values, and generation of robust CEs