A comparative exploration of SHAP and LIME for enhancing the interpretability of machine learning models in obesity prediction

In the realm of health-related machine learning classifications, understanding the decisions made by models is of paramount importance. This study presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of two prominent model-agnostic interpretability tools, SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations) and LIME (Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations), to illuminate the workings of machine learning models in obesity classification. While powerful machine learning models often operate as “black boxes”, leaving users and stakeholders in the dark about the rationale behind their decisions, SHAP and LIME offer pathways to shed light on the inner workings of these models by unveiling their feature importance and local model behaviour. This study aims to compare the different techniques used in obesity classification and identify their respective strengths and weaknesses. The study found that a family history of diseases like diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease are strong predictors of obesity across all classification techniques we considered thus emphasizing the robustness of these factors. Moreover, our analysis showcases the impact of lifestyle factors, such as dietary habits and physical activity, on obesity classification.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Human Science Research Council SA
Published
2026-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14749/32361144
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A comparative exploration of SHAP and LIME for enhancing the interpretability of machine learning models in obesity prediction

Human Sciences Research Council
Human Science Research Council SA
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
article

A comparative exploration of SHAP and LIME for enhancing the interpretability of machine learning models in obesity prediction

Human Sciences Research Council
article en

Abstract

In the realm of health-related machine learning classifications, understanding the decisions made by models is of paramount importance. This study presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of two prominent model-agnostic interpretability tools, SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations) and LIME (Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations), to illuminate the workings of machine learning models in obesity classification. While powerful machine learning models often operate as “black boxes”, leaving users and stakeholders in the dark about the rationale behind their decisions, SHAP and LIME offer pathways to shed light on the inner workings of these models by unveiling their feature importance and local model behaviour. This study aims to compare the different techniques used in obesity classification and identify their respective strengths and weaknesses. The study found that a family history of diseases like diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease are strong predictors of obesity across all classification techniques we considered thus emphasizing the robustness of these factors. Moreover, our analysis showcases the impact of lifestyle factors, such as dietary habits and physical activity, on obesity classification.

Human Science Research Council SA
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A comparative exploration of SHAP and LIME for enhancing the interpretability of machine learning models in obesity prediction — Human Sciences Research Council · Human Science Research Council SA (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS