Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

MCCE: Monte Carlo sampling of realistic counterfactual explanations

Published 18 Nov 2021 in stat.ML and cs.LG | (2111.09790v2)

Abstract: We introduce MCCE: Monte Carlo sampling of valid and realistic Counterfactual Explanations for tabular data, a novel counterfactual explanation method that generates on-manifold, actionable and valid counterfactuals by modeling the joint distribution of the mutable features given the immutable features and the decision. Unlike other on-manifold methods that tend to rely on variational autoencoders and have strict prediction model and data requirements, MCCE handles any type of prediction model and categorical features with more than two levels. MCCE first models the joint distribution of the features and the decision with an autoregressive generative model where the conditionals are estimated using decision trees. Then, it samples a large set of observations from this model, and finally, it removes the samples that do not obey certain criteria. We compare MCCE with a range of state-of-the-art on-manifold counterfactual methods using four well-known data sets and show that MCCE outperforms these methods on all common performance metrics and speed. In particular, including the decision in the modeling process improves the efficiency of the method substantially.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (41)
  1. Borisov V, Seffler K, Leemann T, et al (2023) Language models are realistic tabular data generators. In: Proceeedings of ICLR 2023 Breiman et al (1984) Breiman L, Friedman J, Olshen R, et al (1984) Classification and regression trees. Chapman and Hall Brughmans et al (2023) Brughmans D, Leyman P, Martens D (2023) NICE: An algorithm for nearest instance counterfactual explanations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–39 Chen and Guestrin (2016) Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Breiman L, Friedman J, Olshen R, et al (1984) Classification and regression trees. Chapman and Hall Brughmans et al (2023) Brughmans D, Leyman P, Martens D (2023) NICE: An algorithm for nearest instance counterfactual explanations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–39 Chen and Guestrin (2016) Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Brughmans D, Leyman P, Martens D (2023) NICE: An algorithm for nearest instance counterfactual explanations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–39 Chen and Guestrin (2016) Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  2. Breiman L, Friedman J, Olshen R, et al (1984) Classification and regression trees. Chapman and Hall Brughmans et al (2023) Brughmans D, Leyman P, Martens D (2023) NICE: An algorithm for nearest instance counterfactual explanations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–39 Chen and Guestrin (2016) Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Brughmans D, Leyman P, Martens D (2023) NICE: An algorithm for nearest instance counterfactual explanations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–39 Chen and Guestrin (2016) Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  3. Brughmans D, Leyman P, Martens D (2023) NICE: An algorithm for nearest instance counterfactual explanations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–39 Chen and Guestrin (2016) Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  4. Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 785–794 Chi et al (2022) Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  5. Chi CM, Vossler P, Fan Y, et al (2022) Asymptotic properties of high-dimensional random forests. The Annals of Statistics 50(6):3415–3438 Dandl et al (2020) Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  6. Dandl S, Molnar C, Binder M, et al (2020) Multi-objective counterfactual explanations. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Springer, pp 448–469 Dhurandhar et al (2018) Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  7. Dhurandhar A, Chen PY, Luss R, et al (2018) Explanations based on the missing: towards contrastive explanations with pertinent negatives. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp 590–601 Downs et al (2020) Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  8. Downs M, Chu JL, Yacoby Y, et al (2020) Cruds: Counterfactual recourse using disentangled subspaces. In: ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning Drechsler and Reiter (2011) Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  9. Drechsler J, Reiter JP (2011) An empirical evaluation of easily implemented, nonparametric methods for generating synthetic datasets. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 55(12):3232–3243 Dwork (2006) Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  10. Dwork C (2006) Differential privacy. In: Automata, Languages and Programming: 33rd International Colloquium, ICALP 2006, Venice, Italy, July 10-14, 2006, Proceedings, Part II 33, Springer, pp 1–12 Germain et al (2015) Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  11. Germain M, Gregor K, Murray I, et al (2015) Made: Masked autoencoder for distribution estimation. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp 881–889 Goethals et al (2022) Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  12. Goethals S, Sörensen K, Martens D (2022) The privacy issue of counterfactual explanations: explanation linkage attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:221012051 Gomez et al (2020) Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  13. Gomez O, Holter S, Yuan J, et al (2020) Vice: Visual counterfactual explanations for machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’20, pp 531–535 Guidotti (2022) Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  14. Guidotti R (2022) Counterfactual explanations and how to find them: literature review and benchmarking. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery pp 1–55 Géron (2019) Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  15. Géron A (2019) Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow, 2nd edition. O’Reilly Media, Inc Hastie et al (2009) Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  16. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman JH, et al (2009) The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, vol 2. Springer Joshi et al (2019) Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  17. Joshi S, Koyejo O, Vijitbenjaronk W, et al (2019) Towards realistic individual recourse and actionable explanations in black-box decision making systems. Safe Machine Learning workshop at ICLR Karimi et al (2020) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  18. Karimi AH, Barthe G, Balle B, et al (2020) Model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for consequential decisions. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 895–905 Karimi et al (2022) Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  19. Karimi AH, Barthe G, Schölkopf B, et al (2022) A survey of algorithmic recourse: contrastive explanations and consequential recommendations. ACM Computing Surveys 55(5):1–29 Keane and Smyth (2020) Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  20. Keane MT, Smyth B (2020) Good counterfactuals and where to find them: A case-based technique for generating counterfactuals for explainable AI (XAI). In: Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development: 28th International Conference, ICCBR 2020, Salamanca, Spain, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 28, Springer, pp 163–178 Laugel et al (2018) Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  21. Laugel T, Lesot MJ, Marsala C, et al (2018) Comparison-based inverse classification for interpretability in machine learning. In: International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems, Springer, pp 100–111 Mahiou et al (2022) Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  22. Mahiou S, Xu K, Ganev G (2022) dpart: Differentially Private Autoregressive Tabular, a General Framework for Synthetic Data Generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:220705810 Mirza and Osindero (2014) Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  23. Mirza M, Osindero S (2014) Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:14111784 Mothilal et al (2020) Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  24. Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 607–617 Nowok et al (2016) Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  25. Nowok B, Raab GM, Dibben C, et al (2016) synthpop: Bespoke creation of synthetic data in R. Journal of Statistical Software 74(11):1–26 Pawelczyk et al (2020) Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  26. Pawelczyk M, Broelemann K, Kasneci G (2020) Learning model-agnostic counterfactual explanations for tabular data. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp 3126–3132 Pawelczyk et al (2021) Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  27. Pawelczyk M, Bielawski S, Van den Heuvel J, et al (2021) Carla: A python library to benchmark algorithmic recourse and counterfactual explanation algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:210800783 Pawelczyk et al (2023) Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  28. Pawelczyk M, Lakkaraju H, Neel S (2023) On the privacy risks of algorithmic recourse. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, pp 9680–9696 Poyiadzi et al (2020) Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  29. Poyiadzi R, Sokol K, Santos-Rodriguez R, et al (2020) Face: Feasible and actionable counterfactual explanations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp 344–350 Rasouli and Chieh Yu (2022) Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  30. Rasouli P, Chieh Yu I (2022) CARE: Coherent actionable recourse based on sound counterfactual explanations. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics pp 1–26 Reiter (2005) Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  31. Reiter JP (2005) Using CART to generate partially synthetic public use microdata. Journal of Official Statistics 21(3):441 Scornet et al (2015) Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  32. Scornet E, Biau G, Vert JP (2015) Consistency of random forests. The Annals of Statistics 43(4):1716–1741 Sklar (1959) Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  33. Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ inst statist univ Paris 8:229–231 Stepin et al (2021) Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  34. Stepin I, Alonso JM, Catala A, et al (2021) A survey of contrastive and counterfactual explanation generation methods for explainable artificial intelligence. IEEE Access 9:11,974–12,001 Tolomei et al (2017) Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  35. Tolomei G, Silvestri F, Haines A, et al (2017) Interpretable predictions of tree-based ensembles via actionable feature tweaking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, KDD ’17, pp 465–474 Ustun et al (2019) Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  36. Ustun B, Spangher A, Liu Y (2019) Actionable recourse in linear classification. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp 10–19 Verma et al (2021) Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  37. Verma S, Dickerson JP, Hines K (2021) Counterfactual explanations for machine learning: Challenges revisited. CoRR abs/2106.07756 Wachter et al (2017) Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  38. Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL & Tech 31:841 Wexler et al (2020) Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  39. Wexler J, Pushkarna M, Bolukbasi T, et al (2020) The what-if tool: Interactive probing of machine learning models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26(1):56–65. 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2934619 Wilson and Martinez (1997) Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  40. Wilson DR, Martinez TR (1997) Improved heterogeneous distance functions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 6:1–34 Xu et al (2019) Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
  41. Xu L, Skoularidou M, Cuesta-Infante A, et al (2019) Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32
Citations (10)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.