REVIEW 2 cited by
Counterfactual Explanations for Machine Learning: Challenges Revisited
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Counterfactual explanations (CFEs) are an emerging technique under the umbrella of interpretability of machine learning (ML) models. They provide ``what if'' feedback of the form ``if an input datapoint were $x'$ instead of $x$, then an ML model's output would be $y'$ instead of $y$.'' Counterfactual explainability for ML models has yet to see widespread adoption in industry. In this short paper, we posit reasons for this slow uptake. Leveraging recent work outlining desirable properties of CFEs and our experience running the ML wing of a model monitoring startup, we identify outstanding obstacles hindering CFE deployment in industry.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Data and AI governance: Promoting equity, ethics, and fairness in large language models
The paper proposes a lifecycle governance framework, built on the authors' BEATS benchmark, to quantify and mitigate bias, ethics, fairness, and factuality failures in large language models.
-
Tabular Diffusion based Actionable Counterfactual Explanations for Network Intrusion Detection
A diffusion-based counterfactual explanation method for network intrusion detection, with distilled fast sampling and decision-tree global rules, is evaluated against six baselines on three NIDS datasets.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.