CARRE: Counterfactual Action Retrieval and Reason Evaluation for Explainable Churn Prescription
Updated 7 h ago · first seen 11 Sept 2026
paper_01M294G6CFRPSTG3Q2XPQJPC34
- Published
- 11 Sept 2026
- T1 · 7 h ago
- arXiv
- 2609.09766
- T1 · 7 h ago
- Category
- cs.CL
- T1 · 7 h ago
Abstract
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.
Authors 3
Minjoo Kim, Sangjin Park, Seung Hwan Cho
Specification
- Official page
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 7 h agohigh
- Arxiv announce type
- replace
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 7 h agohigh
- arXiv id
- 2609.09766
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 7 h agohigh
- Categories
- cs.CL
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 7 h agohigh
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 7 h agohigh
- Primary category
- cs.CL
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 7 h agohigh
- Published
- 11 Sept 2026
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 7 h agohigh
Each value shows its source, tier and observation time. Conflicting claims are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. How AI Atlas records facts →
Provenance
Attributed facts
9
Source tiers
T19
Freshest observation
7 h ago
Conflicts
None
No models linked to this paper yet.
- Authors
- Minjoo Kim, Sangjin Park, Seung Hwan Cho
As of
Rewind the record: see this entity's attributes exactly as AI Atlas knew them on a given day.
Claim history · Official page
Official pageofficial_url1
| Value | Valid from → to | Status | Source | Confidence | Extractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.09766 | → current | current | arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1 | high | deterministic |
Claims are temporal and append-only: a new observation closes the previous claim (valid_to) instead of overwriting it. Conflicting claims from different sources are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. Methodology →
- New paperPaperCARRE: Counterfactual Action Retrieval and Reason Evaluation for Explainable Churn Prescription
New paper: CARRE: Counterfactual Action Retrieval and Reason Evaluation for Explainable Churn Prescription
arxiv
| Source | Document | Type | Tier | Last observed | Snapshots |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| arXiv (Atom API + RSS) | rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.CL | feed | T1· Official | 5 h ago | 1 |
Tier 1 = official/primary, 2 = quality secondary, 3 = community, 4 = unverified. Every snapshot is archived; see all sources and the methodology.