Counterfactuals

Recent momentum

emerging

0 papers in the last 28 days · 0.0% of indexed attention

Twelve weeks of publication activity for this topic as it is defined today.

Weekly history

Recent digests

What was published in this field, kept on the site without email delivery.

Period ending 2026-09-21

21 new papers

A weekly snapshot of new work published in Counterfactuals.

Period ending 2026-09-14

6 new papers

A weekly snapshot of new work published in Counterfactuals.

Period ending 2026-09-07

4 new papers

A weekly snapshot of new work published in Counterfactuals.

Inside this field

Focused directions

361 papers

Latest in Counterfactuals

Date pendingcs.CL

CARRE: Counterfactual Action Retrieval and Reason Evaluation for Explainable Churn Prescription

Churn models typically identify high-risk customers but do not specify which feasible retention action should be considered or why that action is appropriate. We present CARRE (Counterfactual Action Retrieval and Reason Evaluation), a three-stage framework that combines retrieval-augmented candidate generation, cost-aware counterfactual scoring, and large language model (LLM) reasoning. CARRE retrieves a predefined catalog of retention actions, estimates model-predicted churn-risk changes under explicit feature transformations, and generates a structured churn reason and a profile-grounded explanation for the selected action. On the IBM Telco Customer Churn dataset, CARRE achieves 79.8% greater mean model-predicted risk reduction than the plain SHAP baseline and 80.4% greater reduction than the cost-controlled SHAP+Cost baseline across 313 high-risk test cases; its cost-normalized efficiency is 10.5% higher than that of plain SHAP. On a 136-case reason-stratified evaluation sample, diagnosis-driven prompt refinement increases weak-label agreement from 79.4% to 90.4%, with no auxiliary-plan constraint violations; because the same sample was used for error diagnosis and re-evaluation, the post-refinement result is not an independent estimate of generalization. For 135 explanations generated using the pre-refinement v2 reason outputs, two cross-vendor LLM judges assign mean scores ranging from 4.02 to 5.00 out of 5, although one judge saturates on actionability, and a deterministic audit finds no contradictions among 66 verifiable profile claims. Retrieval ablations show that k=5 provides the best evaluated compromise between high candidate coverage and downstream reasoning agreement in this dataset. These results illustrate how retrieval, model-based counterfactual scoring, and language generation can be separated and jointly evaluated in a prototype churn-prescription pipeline.
Minjoo Kim, Sangjin Park, Seung Hwan Cho