Sample based Explanations via Generalized Representers
Che-Ping Tsai, Chih-Kuan Yeh, Pradeep Ravikumar
Abstract
We propose a general class of sample based explanations of machine learning models, which we term generalized representers. To measure the effect of a training sample on a model's test prediction, generalized representers use two components: a global sample importance that quantifies the importance of the training point to the model and is invariant to test samples, and a local sample importance that measures similarity between the training sample and the test point with a kernel. A key contribution of the paper is to show that generalized representers are the only class of sample based explanations satisfying a natural set of axiomatic properties. We discuss approaches to extract global importances given a kernel, and also natural choices of kernels given modern non-linear models. As we show, many popular existing sample based explanations could be cast as generalized representers with particular choices of kernels and approaches to extract global importances. Additionally, we conduct empirical comparisons of different generalized representers on two image and two text classification datasets.
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 8580a22d-8eff-4e29-ba04-2d65b8f3e717Cited by top-tier papers6
- Helpful or Harmful Data? Fine-tuning-free Shapley Attribution for Explaining Language Model PredictionsJingtan Wang, Xiaoqiang Lin, Rui Qiao, Chuan-Sheng Foo et al.ICML 2024 · 12 citations
- Task-oriented Time Series Imputation Evaluation via Generalized RepresentersZhixian Wang, Linxiao Yang, Liang Sun, Qingsong Wen et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 11 citations
- Faithful and Efficient Explanations for Neural Networks via Neural Tangent Kernel Surrogate ModelsAndrew Engel, Zhichao Wang, Natalie Frank, Ioana Dumitriu et al.ICLR 2024 · 8 citations
- Interpretation Meets Safety: A Survey on Interpretation Methods and Tools for Improving LLM SafetySeongmin Lee, Aeree Cho, Grace C. Kim, Shengyun Peng et al.EMNLP 2025 · 1 citation
- Equivariant Neural Tangent KernelsPhilipp Misof, Pan Kessel, Jan E. GerkenICML 2025
Builds on21
- Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient DescentGarima Pruthi, Frederick Liu, Satyen Kale, Mukund SundararajanNeurIPS 2020 · 784 citations
- On Completeness-aware Concept-Based Explanations in Deep Neural NetworksChih-Kuan Yeh, Been Kim, Sercan Ömer Arik, Chun-Liang Li et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 390 citations
- TRAK: Attributing Model Behavior at ScaleSung Min Park, Kristian Georgiev, Andrew Ilyas, Guillaume Leclerc et al.ICML 2023 · 260 citations
- Data Valuation using Reinforcement LearningJinsung Yoon, Sercan Ömer Arik, Tomas PfisterICML 2020 · 236 citations
- The Shapley Taylor Interaction IndexMukund Sundararajan, Kedar Dhamdhere, Ashish AgarwalICML 2020 · 199 citations
Related papers
- Representer Point Selection for Explaining Regularized High-dimensional ModelsChe-Ping Tsai, Jiong Zhang, Hsiang-Fu Yu, Eli Chien et al.ICML 2023 · 5 citations
- A Learning Theoretic Perspective on Local ExplainabilityJeffrey Li, Vaishnavh Nagarajan, Gregory Plumb, Ameet TalwalkarICLR 2021 · 19 citations
- On Locality of Local Explanation ModelsSahra Ghalebikesabi, Lucile Ter-Minassian, Karla DiazOrdaz, Chris C. HolmesNeurIPS 2021 · 52 citations
- ReX: A Framework for Incorporating Temporal Information in Model-Agnostic Local Explanation TechniquesJunhao Liu, Xin ZhangAAAI 2025 · 6 citations
- SELFEXPLAIN: A Self-Explaining Architecture for Neural Text ClassifiersDheeraj Rajagopal, Vidhisha Balachandran, Eduard H. Hovy, Yulia TsvetkovEMNLP 2021 · 39 citations
