Leveraging Predictive Equivalence in Decision Trees

Hayden McTavish, Zachery Boner, Jon Donnelly, Margo Seltzer, Cynthia Rudin
2/14/2026

No official code found. Best implementation: HaydenMcT/predictive-equivalence (2 stars, MIT, last commit 2025-11-06).

Abstract

Decision trees are widely used for interpretable machine learning due to their clearly structured reasoning process. However, this structure belies a challenge we refer to as predictive equivalence: a given tree's decision boundary can be represented by many different decision trees. The presence of models with identical decision boundaries but different evaluation processes makes model selection challenging. The models will have different variable importance and behave differently in the presence of missing values, but most optimization procedures will arbitrarily choose one such model to return. We present a boolean logical representation of decision trees that does not exhibit predictive equivalence and is faithful to the underlying decision boundary. We apply our representation to several downstream machine learning tasks. Using our representation, we show that decision trees are surprisingly robust to test-time missingness of feature values; we address predictive equivalence's impact on quantifying variable importance; and we present an algorithm to optimize the cost of reaching predictions.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations(1)

MIT

Official Code Supplement for ICML 2025 Paper "Leveraging Predictive Equivalence in Decision Trees"

21Shell, PythonMay 20, 202511 months agoMIT

Cite this paper

@article{mctavish2026leveraging,
  title  = {Leveraging Predictive Equivalence in Decision Trees},
  author = {Hayden McTavish and Zachery Boner and Jon Donnelly and Margo Seltzer and Cynthia Rudin},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2506.14143},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.14143},
  journal = {ICML 2025 2025}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2506.14143.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2506.14143)

Discussion