Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Blog post: comparing SHAP with feature importances #107

Open
glemaitre opened this issue Apr 26, 2022 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #139
Open

Blog post: comparing SHAP with feature importances #107

glemaitre opened this issue Apr 26, 2022 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #139

Comments

@glemaitre
Copy link
Member

As discussed in a developer's meeting, we decided to move the example available here as a blog post.

This issue is intended to keep track of the subject.
@cmarmo cmarmo mentioned this issue May 10, 2022
Closed
@glemaitre
Copy link
Member Author

I have the following notebook that could help in adding some interesting point: https://github.com/glemaitre/trail_seminar/blob/main/notebooks/plot_shap.ipynb

I would avoid speaking about the issue with the SHAP API since we should propose a fix to raise some warnings. However, we should discuss the pitfall at the end of the notebook.

@lucyleeow
Copy link
Member

Thanks @glemaitre ! I will have a closer look at your notebooks (also watched your pydata talk, great talk!).

I notice that 'kernel' algorithm is still not exposed in the new SHAP API (though saw shap/shap#2452). I am thinking that I will amend my tutorial content such that I only use the tree method and not the kernel method (so I can use the new API). I would like to include Oliviers suggestion: scikit-learn/scikit-learn#18139 (comment) as well. WDYT, any thoughts @glemaitre ?

@glemaitre
Copy link
Member Author

I notice that 'kernel' algorithm is still not exposed in the new SHAP API

Yes, I did not complete the PR yet there. The project seems really stalled nowadays (I sent some PRs a couple of months ago to fix the CI, but it get reviewed nor merged).

It might be an argument to maybe think about implementing a subset of the SHAP methods at some point.

WDYT, any thoughts @glemaitre ?

Yes, that would be great. I did not get time to work on the tutorial but I would be more than happy to review and even make some pair-programming sessions.

Something that I wanted to investigate is the breakage of the symmetry axiom of the Shapley values with the tree approach and if we can find an example on a real-world dataset where we could exhibit the issue.

@lucyleeow
Copy link
Member

lucyleeow commented Sep 8, 2022 •
edited

Yes, that would be great. I did not get time to work on the tutorial but I would be more than happy to review and even make some pair-programming sessions.

Great, I will make a first draft and we can see!

Something that I wanted to investigate is the breakage of the symmetry axiom of the Shapley values with the tree approach and if we can find an example on a real-world dataset where we could exhibit the issue.

Sounds interesting but beyond my level...and maybe not in the scope of this blog post?
Edit: Is this a problem specifically with the tree approximation?

@lucyleeow lucyleeow linked a pull request Sep 16, 2022 that will close this issue
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Add post on SHAP vs permutation importances lucyleeow/blog
2 participants
@glemaitre @lucyleeow