Variable importance without impossible data
The most popular methods for measuring importance of the variables in a black
box prediction algorithm make use of synthetic inputs that combine predictor
variables from multiple subjects. These inputs can be unlikely, physically
impossible, or even logically impossible. As a result, the predictions for such
cases can be based on data very unlike any the black box was trained on. We
think that users cannot trust an explanation of the decision of a prediction
algorithm when the explanation uses such values. Instead we advocate a method
called Cohort Shapley that is grounded in economic game theory and unlike most
other game theoretic methods, it uses only actually observed data to quantify
variable importance. Cohort Shapley works by narrowing the cohort of subjects
judged to be similar to a target subject on one or more features. A feature is
important if using it to narrow the cohort makes a large difference to the
cohort mean. We illustrate it on an algorithmic fairness problem where it is
essential to attribute importance to protected variables that the model was not
trained on. For every subject and every predictor variable, we can compute the
importance of that predictor to the subject's predicted response or to their
actual response. These values can be aggregated, for example over all Black
subjects, and we propose a Bayesian bootstrap to quantify uncertainty in both
individual and aggregate Shapley values.