Marginal Contribution Feature Importance - an Axiomatic Approach for Explaining Data
Amnon Catav, Boyang Fu, Yazeed Zoabi, Ahuva Weiss-Meilik, Noam Shomron, Jason Ernst, Sriram Sankararaman, Ran Gilad-Bachrach
Abstract
In recent years, methods were proposed for assigning feature importance scores to measure the contribution of individual features. While in some cases the goal is to understand a specific model, in many cases the goal is to understand the contribution of certain properties (features) to a realworld phenomenon. Thus, a distinction has been made between feature importance scores that explain a model and scores that explain the data. When explaining the data, machine learning models are used as proxies in settings where conducting many real-world experiments is expensive or prohibited. While existing feature importance scores show great success in explaining models, we demonstrate their limitations when explaining the data, especially in the presence of correlations between features. Therefore, we develop a set of axioms to capture properties expected from a feature importance score when explaining data and prove that there exists only one score that satisfies all of them, the Marginal Contribution Feature Importance (MCI). We analyze the theoretical properties of this score function and demonstrate its merits empirically.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 5ee9d18e-c5fa-4431-b6dd-c958734051b9Cited by top-tier papers6
- WeightedSHAP: analyzing and improving Shapley based feature attributionsYongchan Kwon, James Y. ZouNeurIPS 2022 · 60 citations
- Game-theoretic Counterfactual Explanation for Graph Neural NetworksChirag Chhablani, Sarthak Jain, Akshay Channesh, Ian A. Kash et al.WWW 2024 · 14 citations
- Feature Selection for Network Intrusion DetectionCharles Westphal, Stephen Hailes, Mirco MusolesiKDD 2025 · 3 citations
- Aggregate Models, Not Explanations: Improving Feature Importance EstimationJoseph Paillard, Angel REYERO LOBO, Denis-Alexander Engemann, Thirion BertrandICML 2026 · 1 citation
- Active feature acquisition via explainability-driven rankingOsman Berke Güney, Ketan Suhaas Saichandran, Karim Elzokm, Ziming Zhang et al.ICML 2025
Builds on5
- The Many Shapley Values for Model ExplanationMukund Sundararajan, Amir NajmiICML 2020 · 799 citations
- Understanding Global Feature Contributions With Additive Importance MeasuresIan Covert, Scott M. Lundberg, Su-In LeeNeurIPS 2020 · 476 citations
- Problems with Shapley-value-based explanations as feature importance measuresI. Elizabeth Kumar, Suresh Venkatasubramanian, Carlos Scheidegger, Sorelle A. FriedlerICML 2020 · 458 citations
- Asymmetric Shapley values: incorporating causal knowledge into model-agnostic explainabilityChristopher Frye, Colin Rowat, Ilya FeigeNeurIPS 2020 · 246 citations
- Efficient nonparametric statistical inference on population feature importance using Shapley valuesBrian D. Williamson, Jean FengICML 2020 · 86 citations
Related papers
- Feature Importance Metrics in the Presence of Missing DataHenrik von Kleist, Joshua Wendland, Ilya Shpitser, Carsten MarrICML 2025
- A Unified Taylor Framework for Revisiting Attribution MethodsHuiqi Deng, Na Zou, Mengnan Du, Weifu Chen et al.AAAI 2021 · 25 citations
- On Measuring Causal Contributions via do-interventionsYonghan Jung, Shiva Prasad Kasiviswanathan, Jin Tian, Dominik Janzing et al.ICML 2022 · 36 citations
- Evaluations and Methods for Explanation through Robustness AnalysisCheng-Yu Hsieh, Chih-Kuan Yeh, Xuanqing Liu, Pradeep Kumar Ravikumar et al.ICLR 2021 · 68 citations
- Towards Trustable SHAP ScoresOlivier Létoffé, Xuanxiang Huang, João Marques-SilvaAAAI 2025 · 23 citations
