Personalized Decision Making -- A Conceptual Introduction

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.09558v1
• Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 22:21:29 GMT
• Title: Personalized Decision Making -- A Conceptual Introduction
• Authors: Scott Mueller and Judea Pearl
• Abstract summary: We show that by combining experimental and observational studies we can obtain valuable information about individual behavior. We conclude that by combining experimental and observational studies we can improve decisions over those obtained from experimental studies alone.
• Score: 8.008051073614174
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Personalized decision making targets the behavior of a specific individual, while population-based decision making concerns a sub-population resembling that individual. This paper clarifies the distinction between the two and explains why the former leads to more informed decisions. We further show that by combining experimental and observational studies we can obtain valuable information about individual behavior and, consequently, improve decisions over those obtained from experimental studies alone.

Related papers

• Learning to Represent Individual Differences for Choice Decision Making [37.97312716637515]
  We use representation learning to characterize individual differences in human performance on an economic decision-making task. We demonstrate that models using representation learning to capture individual differences consistently improve decision predictions. Our results propose that representation learning offers a useful and flexible tool to capture individual differences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T17:10:05Z)
• Evaluating Prediction-based Interventions with Human Decision Makers In Mind [1.192656186481075]
  We formalize and investigate various models of human decision-making in the presence of a predictive model aid. We show that each of these behavioural models produces dependencies across decision subjects and results in the violation of existing assumptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-12T20:35:52Z)
• Decision Theoretic Foundations for Experiments Evaluating Human Decisions [18.27590643693167]
  We argue that to attribute loss in human performance to forms of bias, an experiment must provide participants with the information that a rational agent would need to identify the utility-maximizing decision. As a demonstration, we evaluate the extent to which recent evaluations of decision-making from the literature on AI-assisted decisions achieve these criteria.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-25T16:21:37Z)
• Decoding Susceptibility: Modeling Misbelief to Misinformation Through a Computational Approach [61.04606493712002]
  Susceptibility to misinformation describes the degree of belief in unverifiable claims that is not observable. Existing susceptibility studies heavily rely on self-reported beliefs. We propose a computational approach to model users' latent susceptibility levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:22:56Z)
• Explaining by Imitating: Understanding Decisions by Interpretable Policy Learning [72.80902932543474]
  Understanding human behavior from observed data is critical for transparency and accountability in decision-making. Consider real-world settings such as healthcare, in which modeling a decision-maker's policy is challenging. We propose a data-driven representation of decision-making behavior that inheres transparency by design, accommodates partial observability, and operates completely offline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T13:06:14Z)
• Sequential Processing of Observations in Human Decision-Making Systems [27.09995424490989]
  We consider a binary hypothesis testing problem involving a group of human decision-makers. The humans use a belief model to accumulate the log-likelihood ratios until they cease observing the phenomenon. The global decision-maker for a binary hypothesis testing problem when the global decision-maker is a machine, fuses the human decisions using the Chair-Varshney rule.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-18T20:22:05Z)
• Learning the Preferences of Uncertain Humans with Inverse Decision Theory [10.926992035470372]
  We study the setting of inverse decision theory (IDT), a framework where a human is observed making non-sequential binary decisions under uncertainty. In IDT, the human's preferences are conveyed through their loss function, which expresses a tradeoff between different types of mistakes. We show that it is actually easier to identify preferences when the decision problem is more uncertain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-19T00:11:13Z)
• Decision Making with Differential Privacy under a Fairness Lens [65.16089054531395]
  The U.S. Census Bureau releases data sets and statistics about groups of individuals that are used as input to a number of critical decision processes. To conform to privacy and confidentiality requirements, these agencies are often required to release privacy-preserving versions of the data. This paper studies the release of differentially private data sets and analyzes their impact on some critical resource allocation tasks under a fairness perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-16T21:04:19Z)
• Precarity: Modeling the Long Term Effects of Compounded Decisions on Individual Instability [7.993424873879106]
  There has hardly been any focus on precarity which is the term that encapsulates the instability in people's lives. A negative outcome can overspread to other decisions and measures of well-being. We propose a modeling framework that simulates the effects of compounded decision-making on precarity over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-24T23:38:07Z)
• Indecision Modeling [50.00689136829134]
  It is important that AI systems act in ways which align with human values. People are often indecisive, and especially so when their decision has moral implications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-15T18:32:37Z)
• Learning "What-if" Explanations for Sequential Decision-Making [92.8311073739295]
  Building interpretable parameterizations of real-world decision-making on the basis of demonstrated behavior is essential. We propose learning explanations of expert decisions by modeling their reward function in terms of preferences with respect to "what if" outcomes. We highlight the effectiveness of our batch, counterfactual inverse reinforcement learning approach in recovering accurate and interpretable descriptions of behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-02T14:24:17Z)
• Inverse Active Sensing: Modeling and Understanding Timely Decision-Making [111.07204912245841]
  We develop a framework for the general setting of evidence-based decision-making under endogenous, context-dependent time pressure. We demonstrate how it enables modeling intuitive notions of surprise, suspense, and optimality in decision strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-25T02:30:45Z)
• Fairness in Learning-Based Sequential Decision Algorithms: A Survey [22.252241233231263]
  We will focus on two types of sequential decisions: past decisions have no impact on the underlying user population and thus no impact on future data. In each case the impact of various fairness interventions on the underlying population is examined.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-14T15:49:57Z)

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.