Explainable bank failure prediction models: Counterfactual explanations to reduce the failure risk
The accuracy and understandability of bank failure prediction models are crucial. While interpretable models like logistic regression are favored for their explainability, complex models such as random forest, support vector machines, and deep learning offer higher predictive performance but lower explainability. These models, known as black boxes, make it difficult to derive actionable insights. To address this challenge, using counterfactual explanations is suggested. These explanations demonstrate how changes in input variables can alter the model output and suggest ways to mitigate bank failure risk. The key challenge lies in selecting the most effective method for generating useful counterfactuals, which should demonstrate validity, proximity, sparsity, and plausibility. The paper evaluates several counterfactual generation methods: WhatIf, Multi Objective, and Nearest Instance Counterfactual Explanation, and also explores resampling methods like undersampling, oversampling, SMOTE, and the cost sensitive approach to address data imbalance in bank failure prediction in the US. The results indicate that the Nearest Instance Counterfactual Explanation method yields higher quality counterfactual explanations, mainly using the cost sensitive approach. Overall, the Multi Objective Counterfactual and Nearest Instance Counterfactual Explanation methods outperform others regarding validity, proximity, and sparsity metrics, with the cost sensitive approach providing the most desirable counterfactual explanations. These findings highlight the variability in the performance of counterfactual generation methods across different balancing strategies and machine learning models, offering valuable strategies to enhance the utility of black box bank failure prediction models.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
counterfactualCounterfactual ExplanationMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
CausalGraphX: A Counterfactual Graph Neural Network Framework for Explainable Systemic Risk Assessment
The interconnected nature of global financial systems makes them vulnerable to systemic risks, where the failure of a few institutions can trigger catastrophic cascading defaults. Traditional risk models often fail to ca…
Graph Neural NetworkCounterfactual Explanations for Predictive Business Process Monitoring
Predictive business process monitoring increasingly leverages sophisticated prediction models. Although sophisticated models achieve consistently higher prediction accuracy than simple models, one major drawback is their…
counterfactualCounterfactual ExplanationExplanation GenerationMulti-class Classification+2ExplainableFold: Understanding AlphaFold Prediction with Explainable AI
This paper presents ExplainableFold, an explainable AI framework for protein structure prediction. Despite the success of AI-based methods such as AlphaFold in this field, the underlying reasons for their predictions rem…
counterfactualPredictionProtein Structure PredictionCounterfactual Explainable Recommendation
By providing explanations for users and system designers to facilitate better understanding and decision making, explainable recommendation has been an important research problem. In this paper, we propose Counterfactual…
Causal InferencecounterfactualCounterfactual ExplanationCounterfactual Reasoning+3Exploring Energy Landscapes for Minimal Counterfactual Explanations: Applications in Cybersecurity and Beyond
Counterfactual explanations have emerged as a prominent method in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), providing intuitive and actionable insights into Machine Learning model decisions. In contrast to other traditi…
counterfactualExplainable artificial intelligenceExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Fairness