Data geometry preserves prediction but reshapes explanation

Abstract

Across scientific domains, empirical data often give rise to positive semidefinite matrices that encode similarities, couplings or interactions and induce natural geometries. We investigate whether changing the geometry used to compare the same empirical representations preserves subject-level performance and the local structures from which explanations are derived, a question we term the prediction explanation invariance problem. We address this problem across morphometric MRI, fMRI and EEG data by comparing Frobenius and trace geometries applied to the same empirical matrices. Predictive performance was broadly preserved across geometries, but comparable performance did not imply agreement in subject-level decision scores or predicted labels. Predictive similarity also masked geometry-dependent differences in local neighbourhoods, perturbation sensitivities and explanatory rankings. Dimensionality reduction made the two subject-space geometries progressively more concordant, while classification performance and decision-level agreement declined. These results identify data geometry as a hidden degree of freedom in explainability: similar performance does not guarantee invariant decisions or explanations.