On Correcting SHAP Scores

Overview

• Examines the issue of correcting SHAP scores, which are a popular method for explaining the predictions of machine learning models.
• Proposes a new approach to address known biases in SHAP scores.
• Demonstrates improved performance on various benchmark datasets.

Plain English Explanation

SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations) is a technique used to understand how different features of a machine learning model contribute to its predictions. However, SHAP scores can be biased, leading to potentially misleading explanations.

This paper introduces a new method to "correct" SHAP scores and address these biases. The key idea is to adjust the SHAP scores based on the inherent importance of each feature, rather than treating all features equally.

For example, imagine a model that predicts whether an email is spam or not. The model might find that the presence of certain keywords is a strong indicator of spam. However, the SHAP scores could be biased if those keywords also appear frequently in non-spam emails. The proposed correction adjusts the SHAP scores to account for this, providing more accurate explanations of the model's predictions.

The authors demonstrate that their corrected SHAP scores outperform the original SHAP scores on various benchmark datasets, helping to improve the interpretability of machine learning models.

Technical Explanation

The paper first provides a formal definition of the SHAP framework, which is based on the concept of Shapley values from game theory. SHAP scores quantify the contribution of each feature to the model's prediction, but they can be biased due to the implicit assumption that all features are equally important.

To address this, the authors propose a "corrected SHAP" (cSHAP) approach that adjusts the SHAP scores based on the inherent importance of each feature. This importance is estimated using a separate model that predicts the target variable from the features alone, without the full machine learning model.

The authors then derive the mathematical formulas for computing the corrected SHAP scores and show that they satisfy desirable properties, such as local accuracy and missingness consistency.

The paper presents experiments on several benchmark datasets, including tabular data and text classification tasks. The results demonstrate that the corrected SHAP scores outperform the original SHAP scores in terms of faithfully explaining the model's predictions, as measured by various evaluation metrics.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides a thoughtful approach to addressing the known biases in SHAP scores. By incorporating the inherent importance of features, the corrected SHAP scores offer a more nuanced and accurate way to interpret the model's decision-making process.

One potential limitation is the reliance on a separate model to estimate feature importance, which may introduce additional complexity and computational overhead. The authors acknowledge this and suggest that future work could explore more efficient ways to estimate the required quantities.

Additionally, the paper focuses on binary classification tasks, and it would be interesting to see how the corrected SHAP approach performs on more complex multi-class or regression problems.

Overall, this work contributes to the ongoing efforts to improve the interpretability and reliability of machine learning explanations. The corrected SHAP method offers a promising direction for practitioners and researchers seeking to better understand the decision-making of their models.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel approach to correcting SHAP scores, a popular technique for explaining the predictions of machine learning models. By incorporating the inherent importance of features, the corrected SHAP scores provide more accurate and faithful explanations, as demonstrated on various benchmark datasets.

The proposed method addresses known biases in the original SHAP scores and represents an important step towards improving the interpretability of complex machine learning models. This work has the potential to benefit a wide range of applications where model interpretability is crucial, such as healthcare, finance, and policy decision-making.