Cited by 146Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Computational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in Materials Science

Model agnostic generation of counterfactual explanations for molecules

Open access
Wellawatte, Geemi P., Seshadri, Aditi, White, Andrew D.·2022·Chemical Science

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Generating model agnostic molecular counterfactual explanations to explain model predictions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1039/d1sc05259d

Cites

70 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Lee J. D. See K. A. Hum. Factors 2004 46 50 80 10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392 15151155 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Biran O. and Cotton C., IJCAI-17 workshop on explainable AI (XAI), 2017, pp. 8–13
  3. Sundararajan M., Taly A. and Yan Q., International Conference on Machine Learning, 2017, pp. 3319–3328
  4. Koh P. W. and Liang P., International Conference on Machine Learning, 2017, pp. 1885–1894
  5. Ribeiro M. T., Singh S. and Guestrin C., Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, San Diego, CA, USA, 2016, pp. 1135–1144
  6. Bruckner M. A., Banking & Financial Services Policy Report, 2018, vol. 37
  7. Pearl J., Causality, Cambridge university press, 2009
  8. Stepin I. Alonso J. M. Catala A. Pereira-Fari na M. IEEE Access 2021 9 11974 12001
  9. Ester M., Kriegel H.-P., Sander J. and Xu X., KDD, 1996, pp. 226–231
  10. Kingma D. and Ba J., International Conference on Learning Representations, 2014

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wellawatte, G. P., Seshadri, A., & White, A. D.
Affiliations
University of Rochester (US)
Corresponding author
White, Andrew D.
Venue
Chemical Science
Published
2022
Volume
13
Issue
13
Pages
3697-3705
ISSN
  • 2041-6520 (ISSN-L)
  • 2041-6539
OpenAlex
W4225876201
Cited by
143
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 22
FWCI
9.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Chemical Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ChemRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM137966)
  • National Science Foundation (1764415)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
Keywords
counterfactual explanations, model-agnostic explanation, explainable deep learning, interpretability, black-box models, molecular property prediction, graph neural networks, random forest, sequence models, spurious correlations, molecular structure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review