Causal Explanation of Concept Drift -- A Truly Actionable Approach

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2507.23389
• Title: Causal Explanation of Concept Drift -- A Truly Actionable Approach
• Authors: David Komnick, Kathrin Lammers, Barbara Hammer, Valerie Vaquet, Fabian Hinder (Bielefeld University)
• Classification: cs.LG (Machine Learning)
• Publication Time/Conference: TempXAI workshop at ECML-PKDD 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.23389

Abstract

In a constantly changing world, understanding how these changes affect different systems such as industrial manufacturing or critical infrastructure is crucial. Explaining critical changes (referred to as concept drift in the machine learning field) is the first step toward implementing targeted interventions to prevent or correct model failures and failures and errors in the physical world. Therefore, this paper extends model-based drift explanation to causal explanation, improving the actionability of the provided explanations. The authors evaluate the explanation strategy on multiple use cases, demonstrating the practicality of the framework, which can isolate causally relevant features affected by concept drift, thereby allowing targeted interventions.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Definition

1. Concept Drift Problem: In practical applications, data distribution changes over time, a phenomenon called concept drift, which leads to degraded machine learning model performance
2. Explainability Requirements: Merely detecting drift is insufficient; understanding the causes of drift is necessary to enable effective intervention measures
3. Missing Actionability: Existing drift explanation methods are primarily exploratory, lacking direct actionable guidance

Significance

• Industrial Applications: In critical infrastructure (such as power grids, water distribution networks), understanding drift causes is essential for system monitoring and failure prevention
• Model Maintenance: Accurate drift explanation can guide model adaptation and improvement strategies
• Decision Support: Providing operators with actionable explanations to support autonomous procedures or human intervention decisions

Limitations of Existing Methods

• Model-Based Drift Explanation: While versatile, primarily focuses on exploratory explanation techniques
• Feature Importance Methods: Lack causal reasoning capability, unable to provide direct intervention guidance
• Limited Causal Drift Explanation Research: Few related works, primarily focusing on prediction or detection tasks

Core Contributions

1. Theoretical Framework: Extends the model-based drift explanation framework to the causal explanation domain
2. Mathematical Formalization: Provides rigorous mathematical definitions of drift-reversing interventions
3. Algorithm Implementation: Proposes practical causal drift explanation algorithms based on causal discovery methods
4. Experimental Validation: Validates method effectiveness and stability on semi-synthetic datasets

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input: Data stream with temporal labels S = ((X₁, T₁), (X₂, T₂), ...) Output:

• Core intervention feature set C (direct children of temporal node)
• Conditional feature set P (other parents of core features)
• Complete intervention feature set A (core features and all their ancestors)

Theoretical Foundation

Causal Modeling of Concept Drift

The paper formalizes concept drift as a dependency relationship between data and time:

Definition 1 (Concept Drift): A distribution process (P_T, D_t) exhibits drift if and only if:

1. There exist s, t such that D_t ≠ D_s with probability greater than 0
2. Data X and time T are not independent

Causal Models and Interventions

Based on Bayesian networks and do-calculus:

• Bayesian Network: (G, P_f), where G is a directed acyclic graph and P_f is a set of conditional distributions
• do-operation: P_G(· | do(X_F = x)) represents the distribution after intervention on feature F
• Causal Model: A network is causal if its predictions for all interventions match experimental results

Drift-Reversing Intervention

Definition 5: A feature set F provides drift-reversing intervention if and only if controlling the values of features in F produces the same effect as changing the temporal flow.

Core Theorems

Theorem 2: In a faithful causal model:

1. The temporal node has no parents
2. The temporal node has children if and only if drift exists
3. Every drift-reversing set must contain all children of the temporal node
4. All children of the temporal node and their ancestors constitute a drift-reversing set

Theorem 3: The minimal set of features that need to be changed consists exactly of all direct children of the temporal node.

Algorithm Implementation

Algorithm 1: Causal Explanation of Drift
Input: S = ((X₁, T₁), ...) data stream
1. G ← DetermineDAG(S)  // Run causal discovery algorithm
2. C ← GetChildren(G, f_T)  // Get children of temporal node
3. P ← ∪_{f∈C} GetParents(G, f) \ ({f_T} ∪ C)
4. A ← ∪_{f∈C} GetAncesters(G, f) \ {f_T}
5. return (C, P, A)

Experimental Setup

Datasets

Semi-synthetic datasets constructed from Adult and Portuguese Student Performance datasets:

Adult Dataset Scenarios:

• Adult Inflation: Inflation increases the likelihood of high monetary values
• Adult Women in STEM: Women are more likely to work in STEM fields

Student Dataset Scenarios:

• Student Girls Support: Female students participate in support programs
• Student Boys Support: Male students participate in support programs

Data Scale:

• Adult: approximately 48,800 samples, drift point at 25,000
• Student: 5,000 samples, drift point at 2,000

Evaluation Methods

• Causal Structure Recovery Accuracy: Comparing detected edges with ground truth causal graphs
• Drift Feature Identification Stability: Assessing consistency in identifying temporal node children
• 10 Independent Experiments: Evaluating result stability

Implementation Details

• PC algorithm from causal-learn Python package
• g-square independence test
• Default parameter settings

Experimental Results

PC Algorithm Performance Analysis

Adult Dataset:

• Correct detection rate: 50% (19/38 edges)
• 9 edges with incorrect direction, 10 edges undetected

Student Dataset:

• Correct detection rate: 30.77% (8/26 edges)
• Poor performance primarily due to insufficient samples relative to feature count

Drift Explanation Results

Adult Women in STEM Scenario

• Success Rate: Correctly identified occupation as drift feature in 9/10 experiments
• Temporal Relationship: T detected as parent of occupation
• Stability: Other ancestor features consistent with non-drifted data

Adult Inflation Scenario

• Multi-Feature Drift: Correctly identified all three drift features (capital-gain, capital-loss, income) in 8/10 experiments
• Correlation Impact: capital-gain undetected in 2 experiments due to strong feature correlation

Student Support Scenario

• High Accuracy: Despite poor overall causal graph recovery quality, correctly identified schoolsup as the sole drift feature in all experiments
• Conditional Features: Correctly identified sex as conditional variable

Key Findings

1. No False Positives: Temporal feature never connected to unrelated features
2. Strong Drift Detection: Strong concept drift reliably detected even with poor data quality
3. Stability: Drift feature identification demonstrates stable performance in most cases

Related Work

Concept Drift Explanation

• Visualization Methods: Primarily focus on drift detection and quantification
• Feature-Level Explanation: Provides feature-level drift analysis
• Model-Based Explanation: Uses surrogate models to compute explanations

Causal Drift Explanation

• Limited Research: Very few related works
• DAG Comparison Methods: Comparing causal models before and after drift
• NOTEARS Algorithm: Online method for causal discovery

Feature Correlation Theory

• Drift-Inducing Features: Features causing drift
• Faithful Drift Features: Features following drift
• Markov Boundary: Connection to the paper's theoretical framework

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Theoretical Contribution: Successfully introduces causal reasoning into concept drift explanation
2. Practicality: Provides direct actionable intervention guidance
3. Stability: Reliably identifies drift features even when causal discovery algorithms perform poorly

Limitations

1. Causal Discovery Dependency: Method effectiveness limited by underlying causal discovery algorithm accuracy
2. Single Causal Graph Assumption: Assumes entire dataset can be described by one causal graph
3. Data Requirements: Requires sufficient samples to support reliable independence testing

Future Directions

1. Feature Correlation Theory Integration: Exploring relationships between causal discovery and feature correlation to reduce data requirements
2. Local Explanations: Providing more localized explanations for specific subgroups
3. Multiple Causal Graph Extension: Handling complex scenarios requiring multiple causal graphs

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor: Provides complete mathematical formalization framework with rigorous proofs from definitions to theorems
2. Strong Innovation: First systematic combination of causal reasoning with concept drift explanation
3. High Practical Value: Provides direct intervention guidance with genuine actionability
4. Reasonable Experimental Design: Uses semi-synthetic data to ensure ground truth availability

Weaknesses

1. Limited Experimental Scale: Testing only on variants of two datasets
2. Single Causal Discovery Algorithm: Primarily relies on PC algorithm, unexplored effects of other algorithms
3. Insufficient Real-World Validation: Lacks verification in real industrial scenarios
4. Missing Complexity Analysis: Lacks detailed analysis of algorithm time and space complexity

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Opens new research direction in concept drift explanation field
2. Practical Value: Provides new tools for critical infrastructure monitoring
3. Reproducibility: Provides open-source code facilitating reproduction and extension

Applicable Scenarios

1. Industrial Monitoring: Power grids, water distribution networks, and other critical infrastructure
2. Quality Control: Product quality monitoring in manufacturing
3. Financial Risk Management: Drift analysis in credit assessment models
4. Medical Diagnosis: Diagnostic model applicability analysis across different populations

References

The paper cites 30 related references, primarily including:

• Classical works on concept drift detection and adaptation (Gama et al., 2014)
• Survey articles on explainable AI (Adadi & Berrada, 2018)
• Foundational theories in causal reasoning (Pearl, 2009)
• Model-based drift explanation frameworks (Hinder et al., 2023)

This paper makes important contributions at both theoretical and practical levels, providing a novel causal perspective on concept drift explanation with significant academic value and practical significance. Despite some limitations, it establishes a solid foundation for future research.