The paper introduces counterfactual (CF) marginalisation, a test‑time evaluation method that assesses how robust classification models are to nuisance variables such as age or sex. By using a CF image generator to intervene on these parent variables, the method creates counterfactual versions of each test image and averages predictions over a chosen intervention distribution, yielding intervention‑aware predictions that filter out demographic effects while retaining patient‑specific latent information. These predictions are then used to define metrics for CF risk, calibration, stability, and worst‑case sensitivity, demonstrating the framework’s usefulness for quantitative robustness evaluation.
arXiv:2605.10894v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Deep learning models in medical imaging often fail when deployed in new clinical environments due to distribution shifts in demographics, scanner h...
arXiv:2504. 19621v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Machine learning (ML) systems for medical imaging have demonstrated remarkable diagnostic capabilities, but their susceptibility to biases poses significant risks, since biases may negatively impact generalization performance.
arXiv:2609.14124v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical image analysis is often hindered by biased datasets, which can lead to biased models and limited clinical applicability. A promising strategy...
arXiv:2606. 07399v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative models for counterfactual outcomes have great potential to support decision-making under complex interventions, but existing approaches are limited by unstable estimation, poor generalization across environments, and bias from nuisance model misspecification.
arXiv:2608. 02893v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Counterfactual inference approaches for sequential decision-making typically assume deterministic causal models, where all randomness stems from latent variables.
arXiv:2607. 21806v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Predictive machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used to aid human decision-makers across various high-risk domains such as healthcare and criminal justice.
arXiv:2605.01048v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Counterfactual prompting (i.e., perturbing a single factor and measuring output change) is widely used to evaluate things like LLM bias and C...
arXiv:2607. 14984v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Per-subgroup fairness audits of medical image classifiers face a sample-size problem: minority subgroups in held-out test sets have so few samples that the resulting confidence intervals on per-subgroup performance are wider than the bias the audit is meant to detect.
The paper introduces a classifier‑free method for generating visual counterfactual explanations (VCEs) using Contrastive Analysis (CA). By separating generative factors common to two datasets from those specific to each class, the approach swaps only the salient factors to produce counterfactual images, thereby avoiding reliance on classifier decision boundaries. Leveraging StyleGAN2’s high‑quality synthesis and a feature‑space latent representation, the method supports multiple salient factors per dataset and achieves superior counterfactual quality on three medical imaging datasets.
arXiv:2601. 14590v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Counterfactual explanations (CFEs) provide human-centric interpretability by identifying the minimal, actionable changes required to alter a machine learning model's prediction.
arXiv:2609.24879v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Counterfactual image generation answers questions about how a subject would have looked under retrospective, hypothetical scenarios. Recent methods hav...
arXiv:2606. 04009v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Two-sample testing is a fundamental tool for detecting distributional differences across scientific domains, but classical tests (including kernel-based tests) can be ineffective on high-dimensional structured data such as images.