Thanks, for your willingness to improve this minor element in your book. Although I would have done some tiny adjustment to the text, I think your suggestions are more or less OK. (I don't think I can commit to this PR?)
In any case, as mentioned over in #245, I think the real issue here is in the Shapley section (5.9), not the SHAP section (5.10). I would be happy to contribute a PR with a small paragraph on dependence vs independence for Shapley values at least referencing the "true to the model vs true to the data" paper. This could be a new subsection 5.9.3.4 to replace the current text under disadvantages. The new text in this PR should then reference that. What do you think @christophM?
Thanks, for your willingness to improve this minor element in your book. Although I would have done some tiny adjustment to the text, I think your suggestions are more or less OK. (I don't think I can commit to this PR?)
In any case, as mentioned over in #245, I think the real issue here is in the Shapley section (5.9), not the SHAP section (5.10). I would be happy to contribute a PR with a small paragraph on dependence vs independence for Shapley values at least referencing the "true to the model vs true to the data" paper. This could be a new subsection 5.9.3.4 to replace the current text under disadvantages. The new text in this PR should then reference that. What do you think @christophM?