We next discuss two lines of related literature.

Empirical models of demand for differentiated products rely on low-dimensional product representations to capture substitution patterns. These representations are increasingly proxied by applying ML methods to high-dimensional, unstructured data, including product descriptions and images. When proxies fail to capture the true dimensions of differentiation that drive substitution, standard workflows will deliver biased counterfactuals and invalid inference. We develop a practical toolkit that corrects this bias and ensures valid inference for a broad class of counterfactuals. Our approach applies to market-level and/or individual data, requires minimal additional computation, is efficient, delivers simple formulas for standard errors, and accommodates data-dependent proxies, including embeddings from fine-tuned ML models. It can also be used with standard quantitative attributes when mismeasurement is a concern. In addition, we propose diagnostics to assess the adequacy of the proxy construction and dimension. The approach yields meaningful improvements in predicting counterfactual substitution in both simulations and an empirical application.

Causal inference is a key research area in machine learning, yet confusion reigns over the tools needed to tackle it. There are prevalent claims in the machine learning literature that you need a bespoke causal framework or notation to answer causal questions. In this paper, we want to make it clear that you \emph{can} answer any causal inference question within the realm of probabilistic modelling and inference, without causal-specific tools or notation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate how causal questions can be tackled by writing down the probability of everything. Lastly, we reinterpret causal tools as emerging from standard probabilistic modelling and inference, elucidating their necessity and utility.

Many questions in everyday life as well as in scientific inquiry are causal in nature: "How would

Counterfactual explanations provide ways of achieving a favorable model outcome with minimum input perturbation. However, counterfactual explanations can also be leveraged to reconstruct the model by strategically training a surrogate model to give similar predictions as the original (target) model. In this work, we analyze how model reconstruction using counterfactuals can be improved byfurther leveraging the fact that the counterfactuals also lie quite close to the decision boundary. Our main contribution is to derive novel theoretical relationships between the error in model reconstruction and the number of counterfactual queries required using polytope theory. Our theoretical analysis leads us to propose a strategy for model reconstruction that we call Counterfactual Clamping Attack (CCA) which trains a surrogate model using a unique loss function that treats counterfactuals differently than ordinary instances. Our approach also alleviates the related problem of decision boundary shift that arises in existing model reconstruction approaches when counterfactuals are treated as ordinary instances. Experimental results demonstrate that our strategy improves fidelity between the target and surrogate model predictions on several datasets.