Can local explanation techniques explain linear additive models?

1Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Local model-agnostic additive explanation techniques decompose the predicted output of a black-box model into additive feature importance scores. Questions have been raised about the accuracy of the produced local additive explanations. We investigate this by studying whether some of the most popular explanation techniques can accurately explain the decisions of linear additive models. We show that even though the explanations generated by these techniques are linear additives, they can fail to provide accurate explanations when explaining linear additive models. In the experiments, we measure the accuracy of additive explanations, as produced by, e.g., LIME and SHAP, along with the non-additive explanations of Local Permutation Importance (LPI) when explaining Linear and Logistic Regression and Gaussian naive Bayes models over 40 tabular datasets. We also investigate the degree to which different factors, such as the number of numerical or categorical or correlated features, the predictive performance of the black-box model, explanation sample size, similarity metric, and the pre-processing technique used on the dataset can directly affect the accuracy of local explanations.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rahnama, A. H. A., Bütepage, J., Geurts, P., & Boström, H. (2024). Can local explanation techniques explain linear additive models? Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 38(1), 237–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10618-023-00971-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free