Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40112199›Full record

ArticleMolecular informatics2025

Comparing Explanations of Molecular Machine Learning Models Generated with Different Methods for the Calculation of Shapley Values.

Alec Lamens, Jürgen Bajorath

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Classification of Alcohol Use Disorder With Explainable AI.Alcohol, clinical & experimental research · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alec LamensDepartment of Life Science Informatics and Data Science, B-IT, LIMES Program Unit Chemical Biology and Medicinal Chemistry, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Friedrich-Hirzebruch-Allee 5/6, D-53115, Bonn, Germany.
Jürgen BajorathDepartment of Life Science Informatics and Data Science, B-IT, LIMES Program Unit Chemical Biology and Medicinal Chemistry, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Friedrich-Hirzebruch-Allee 5/6, D-53115, Bonn, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0557-5714

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feature attribution methods from explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) provide explanations of machine learning models by quantifying feature importance for predictions of test instances. While features determining individual predictions have frequently been identified in machine learning applications, the consistency of feature importance-based explanations of machine learning models using different attribution methods has not been thoroughly investigated. We have systematically compared model explanations in molecular machine learning. Therefore, a test system of highly accurate compound activity predictions for different targets using different machine learning methods was generated. For these predictions, explanations were computed using methodological variants of the Shapley value formalism, a popular feature attribution approach in machine learning adapted from game theory. Predictions of each model were assessed using a model-agnostic and model-specific Shapley value-based method. The resulting feature importance distributions were characterized and compared by a global statistical analysis using diverse measures. Unexpectedly, methodological variants for Shapley value calculations yielded distinct feature importance distributions for highly accurate predictions. There was only little agreement between alternative model explanations. Our findings suggest that feature importance-based explanations of machine learning predictions should include an assessment of consistency using alternative methods.

Indexed as

Machine Learningapproximation methodscompound activity predictionfeature attributionmachine learningmodel explanationShapley values

Identifiers

PMID40112199
PMCPMC11925390

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.