Paper detail

Exploring the Trade-off between Plausibility, Change Intensity and Adversarial Power in Counterfactual Explanations using Multi-objective Optimization

There is a broad consensus on the importance of deep learning models in tasks involving complex data. Often, an adequate understanding of these models is required when focusing on the transparency of decisions in human-critical applications. Besides other explainability techniques, trustworthiness can be achieved by using counterfactuals, like the way a human becomes familiar with an unknown process: by understanding the hypothetical circumstances under which the output changes. In this work we argue that automated counterfactual generation should regard several aspects of the produced adversarial instances, not only their adversarial capability. To this end, we present a novel framework for the generation of counterfactual examples which formulates its goal as a multi-objective optimization problem balancing three different objectives: 1) plausibility, i.e., the likeliness of the counterfactual of being possible as per the distribution of the input data; 2) intensity of the changes to the original input; and 3) adversarial power, namely, the variability of the model's output induced by the counterfactual. The framework departs from a target model to be audited and uses a Generative Adversarial Network to model the distribution of input data, together with a multi-objective solver for the discovery of counterfactuals balancing among these objectives. The utility of the framework is showcased over six classification tasks comprising image and three-dimensional data. The experiments verify that the framework unveils counterfactuals that comply with intuition, increasing the trustworthiness of the user, and leading to further insights, such as the detection of bias and data misrepresentation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.