human: Given a hyperedge-centered hypergraph: <hypergraph>, where the center hyperedge is induced by one source paper and its member nodes are the cited papers.

Details of the hypergraph:
Center hyperedge (induced by source paper "explaining data driven decisions made by ai systems the counterfactual approach"):
  Abstract: Lack of understanding of the decisions made by model-based AI systems is an important barrier for their adoption. We examine counterfactual explanations as an alternative for explaining AI decisions. The counterfactual approach defines an explanation as a set of the system's data inputs that causally drives the decision (meaning that removing them changes the decision) and is irreducible (meaning that removing any subset of the inputs in the explanation does not change the decision). We generalize previous work on counterfactual explanations, resulting in a framework that (a) is model-agnostic, (b) can address features with arbitrary data types, (c) can explain decisions made by complex AI systems that incorporate multiple models, and (d) is scalable to large numbers of features. We also propose a heuristic procedure to find the most useful explanations depending on the context. We contrast counterfactual explanations with another alternative: methods that explain model predictions by weighting features according to their importance (e.g., SHAP, LIME). This paper presents two fundamental reasons why explaining model predictions is not the same as explaining the decisions made using those predictions, suggesting we should carefully consider whether importance-weight explanations are well-suited to explain decisions made by AI systems. Specifically, we show that (1) features that have a large importance weight for a model prediction may not actually affect the corresponding decision, and (2) importance weights are insufficient to communicate whether and how features influence system decisions. We demonstrate this with several examples, including three detailed case studies that compare the counterfactual approach with SHAP to illustrate various conditions under which counterfactual explanations explain data-driven decisions better than feature importance weights.

Includes members:
  Member "interpretable counterfactual explanations guided by prototypes":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-1 (induced by source paper "causal interpretability for machine learning problems methods and evaluation")
  Member "counterfactual explanation algorithms for behavioral and textual data":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-2 (induced by source paper "survlime a method for explaining machine learning survival models")
  Member "counterfactual explanations without opening the black box automated decisions and the gdpr":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-3 (induced by source paper "causal interpretability for machine learning problems methods and evaluation")
  Member "a unified approach to interpreting model predictions":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-4 (induced by source paper "causal interpretability for machine learning problems methods and evaluation")
  Member "why should i trust you explaining the predictions of any classifier":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-5 (induced by source paper "secure and robust machine learning for healthcare a survey")
  Member "a budget constrained inverse classification framework for smooth classifiers":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-6 (induced by source paper "21 million opportunities a 19 facility investigation of factors affecting hand hygiene compliance via linear predictive models")
  Member "falling rule lists":
    also connected through other hyperedges:
      - Hyperedge HE-7 (induced by source paper "interpretability of blackbox machine learning models through dataview extraction and shadow model creation")

Question: Please tell me which class the source paper belongs to. The 40 classes are: cs.NA(Numerical Analysis), cs.MM(Multimedia), cs.LO(Logic in Computer Science), cs.CY(Computers and Society), cs.CR(Cryptography and Security), cs.DC(Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing), cs.HC(Human-Computer Interaction), cs.CE(Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science), cs.NI(Networking and Internet Architecture), cs.CC(Computational Complexity), cs.AI(Artificial Intelligence), cs.MA(Multiagent Systems), cs.GL(General Literature), cs.NE(Neural and Evolutionary Computing), cs.SC(Symbolic Computation), cs.AR(Hardware Architecture), cs.CV(Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition), cs.GR(Graphics), cs.ET(Emerging Technologies), cs.SY(Systems and Control), cs.CG(Computational Geometry), cs.OH(Other Computer Science), cs.PL(Programming Languages), cs.SE(Software Engineering), cs.LG(Machine Learning), cs.SD(Sound), cs.SI(Social and Information Networks), cs.RO(Robotics), cs.IT(Information Theory), cs.PF(Performance), cs.CL(Computation and Language), cs.IR(Information Retrieval), cs.MS(Mathematical Software), cs.FL(Formal Languages and Automata Theory), cs.DS(Data Structures and Algorithms), cs.OS(Operating Systems), cs.GT(Computer Science and Game Theory), cs.DB(Databases), cs.DL(Digital Libraries), cs.DM(Discrete Mathematics). Directly output the class name.

gpt: cs.LG(Machine Learning)