arXiv preprint ·
Robust to Which Model Change? A Unified Evaluation of Robust Counterfactual Explanations
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Robust counterfactual explanations promise recourse that still works after the model behind it changes. Whether they keep that promise depends on what the change is. A small perturbation of the parameters, retraining on new data, and a new architecture are different events, and each existing method is evaluated against the one it was built for. Reported robustness scores, therefore, answer different questions and cannot be compared. We propose a unified cross-family evaluation protocol that holds factual instances and generated counterfactuals fixed while testing every method against the same eight types of model change. The benchmark compares six robust methods and two standard baselines on four tabular datasets. It characterizes every changed classifier through its outputs and reports empirical robustness together with coverage, base validity, and proximity. We find that relative performance and failure modes vary across change families. Bounded parameter perturbations change 0.95\% of test predictions on average, compared with 4.9\% for bootstrap retraining. Methods with guarantees for these perturbations do not necessarily transfer to other changes. RobX transfers most consistently in our experiments, although greater stability can require larger interventions. We argue that robust CFE methods should be evaluated through a common protocol that specifies the model changes, measures their realized behavioral magnitude, and keeps generation performance separate from robustness.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Machine Learning
A Framework for Identifying, Categorizing, and Explaining Bias in AI-Generated Code
Emergent One-Third Scaling Law as Attention Tries to Concentrate
Causal Retention in Interactive Agents: Interface Factorization and Selective Adaptation
Residual Streams Read, Recurrent States Remember: The Global Workspace in Mamba Models
LLM Parkinsonism: Executive-Control Failure, Token-Inefficient Persistence, and an Uncertainty-Aware Global Executive Control Architecture for Autonomous Language-Model Agents
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.