Maybe InterpretML? It's developed and maintained by Microsoft Research and consolidates a lot of different explainability methods, including SHAP, into a consistent API.

Thank you for that. Does it use the shap library under the hood, or does it have its own implementation for computing Shapley values? If it is using the shap, then I wouldn’t really call this an alternative as it is using the same unmaintained backend.

Eli5, treeinterpreter

I’ll look into ELI5. Treeinterpreter isn’t really general enough for me. I like that shap can work with any model.

try poking around this list, surely there's something in there that fits what you need: https://github.com/stars/dmarx/lists/ml-explainability

EDIT: OK, here are probably your best candidates from that list:

• https://github.com/salesforce/OmniXAI
• https://github.com/Trusted-AI/AIX360
• https://github.com/interpretml/interpret
• https://github.com/pytorch/captum
• https://github.com/MAIF/shapash

And another list: https://github.com/jphall663/awesome-machine-learning-interpretability

Lgbm has native shap support.

I’m guessing since the creator graduated and went to work at Microsoft he can’t maintain it anymore. Follow Patrick Hall for up to date ML interpretability packages and news.

[deleted]

Other than captum, all of those libraries rely on the unmaintained shap library.

Actually ELI5 is no good for me either. Hasn’t been updated for years.

I want a general black box library like shap. Lgbm is tied to gradient boosted trees.

Yep so InterpretML does use the unmaintained shap library unfortunately. Looks like the author of shap works for Microsoft though so maybe he also works on InterpretML? I just don’t understand why shap isn’t being actively maintained since so many projects rely on it.

It would be good if Microsoft could give him time to maintain shap. It’s such an important resource for the ML community.

lol whoops. did you create issues on those project to let them know they're depending on an unmaintained repo?

It's in the spirit of open source to contribute to packages you care about. Just saying

I agree, but it’s pretty hard to contribute if issues and PRs never get looked at. I’m considering making a fork of shap. I just wanted to check whether people had moved on to some other library. From the comments, it appears not.

I started playing with captum a couple of days ago.. Seems ok, but Iv only used it with pytorch..

You might actually be the best candidate to begin to maintain shap.

Why not add whatever fix you need to it yourself?

I can’t really help the current shap project if the PR never gets looked at. In fact, most of the issues I want fixed already have open PRs associated with them. I may look into starting my own fork, but I just wanted to see whether the community had moved on to some other library.

After seeing these comments, I decided to start a fork of shap here. I want to ensure this fork avoids becoming the responsibility of a sole maintainer. Please let me know if you would like to help maintain this vital package for the ML community or join the first discussion here.

You can't contribute if noone merges PRs and manages the project.