From Explanation to Recommendation: Ethical Standards for Algorithmic Recourse

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2205.15406v1
• Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 20:09:42 GMT
• Title: From Explanation to Recommendation: Ethical Standards for Algorithmic Recourse
• Authors: Emily Sullivan and Philippe Verreault-Julien
• Abstract summary: We argue that recourse should be viewed as a recommendation problem, not an explanation problem. We illustrate by considering the case of diversity constraints on algorithmic recourse.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: People are increasingly subject to algorithmic decisions, and it is generally agreed that end-users should be provided an explanation or rationale for these decisions. There are different purposes that explanations can have, such as increasing user trust in the system or allowing users to contest the decision. One specific purpose that is gaining more traction is algorithmic recourse. We first propose that recourse should be viewed as a recommendation problem, not an explanation problem. Then, we argue that the capability approach provides plausible and fruitful ethical standards for recourse. We illustrate by considering the case of diversity constraints on algorithmic recourse. Finally, we discuss the significance and implications of adopting the capability approach for algorithmic recourse research.

Related papers

• Designing Algorithmic Recommendations to Achieve Human-AI Complementarity [2.4247752614854203]
  We formalize the design of recommendation algorithms that assist human decision-makers. We use a potential-outcomes framework to model the effect of recommendations on a human decision-maker's binary treatment choice. We derive minimax optimal recommendation algorithms that can be implemented with machine learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-02T17:15:30Z)
• Online Decision Mediation [72.80902932543474]
  Consider learning a decision support assistant to serve as an intermediary between (oracle) expert behavior and (imperfect) human behavior. In clinical diagnosis, fully-autonomous machine behavior is often beyond ethical affordances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T05:59:43Z)
• The Risks of Recourse in Binary Classification [10.067421338825545]
  We study whether providing algorithmic recourse is beneficial or harmful at the population level. We find that there are many plausible scenarios in which providing recourse turns out to be harmful. We conclude that the current concept of algorithmic recourse is not reliably beneficial, and therefore requires rethinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-01T09:46:43Z)
• Decision-aid or Controller? Steering Human Decision Makers with Algorithms [5.449173263947196]
  We study a decision-aid algorithm that learns about the human decision maker and provides ''personalized recommendations'' to influence final decisions. We discuss the potential applications of such algorithms and their social implications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-23T23:24:26Z)
• Explainable Data-Driven Optimization: From Context to Decision and Back Again [76.84947521482631]
  Data-driven optimization uses contextual information and machine learning algorithms to find solutions to decision problems with uncertain parameters. We introduce a counterfactual explanation methodology tailored to explain solutions to data-driven problems. We demonstrate our approach by explaining key problems in operations management such as inventory management and routing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-24T15:25:16Z)
• Algorithmic Assistance with Recommendation-Dependent Preferences [2.864550757598007]
  We consider the effect and design of algorithmic recommendations when they affect choices. We show that recommendation-dependent preferences create inefficiencies where the decision-maker is overly responsive to the recommendation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-16T09:24:47Z)
• Modularity in Reinforcement Learning via Algorithmic Independence in Credit Assignment [79.5678820246642]
  We show that certain action-value methods are more sample efficient than policy-gradient methods on transfer problems that require only sparse changes to a sequence of previously optimal decisions. We generalize the recently proposed societal decision-making framework as a more granular formalism than the Markov decision process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-28T21:29:13Z)
• Towards Meta-Algorithm Selection [78.13985819417974]
  Instance-specific algorithm selection (AS) deals with the automatic selection of an algorithm from a fixed set of candidates. We show that meta-algorithm-selection can indeed prove beneficial in some cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-17T17:27:33Z)
• Policy Gradient for Continuing Tasks in Non-stationary Markov Decision Processes [112.38662246621969]
  Reinforcement learning considers the problem of finding policies that maximize an expected cumulative reward in a Markov decision process with unknown transition probabilities. We compute unbiased navigation gradients of the value function which we use as ascent directions to update the policy. A major drawback of policy gradient-type algorithms is that they are limited to episodic tasks unless stationarity assumptions are imposed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-16T15:15:42Z)
• A Case for Humans-in-the-Loop: Decisions in the Presence of Erroneous Algorithmic Scores [85.12096045419686]
  We study the adoption of an algorithmic tool used to assist child maltreatment hotline screening decisions. We first show that humans do alter their behavior when the tool is deployed. We show that humans are less likely to adhere to the machine's recommendation when the score displayed is an incorrect estimate of risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-19T07:27:32Z)
• Decisions, Counterfactual Explanations and Strategic Behavior [16.980621769406923]
  We find policies and counterfactual explanations that are optimal in terms of utility in a strategic setting. We show that, given a pre-defined policy, the problem of finding the optimal set of counterfactual explanations is NP-hard. We demonstrate that, by incorporating a matroid constraint into the problem formulation, we can increase the diversity of the optimal set of counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-11T12:04:41Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.