The Best Decisions Are Not the Best Advice: Making Adherence-Aware Recommendations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2209.01874v4
• Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:32:03 GMT
• Title: The Best Decisions Are Not the Best Advice: Making Adherence-Aware Recommendations
• Authors: Julien Grand-Cl\'ement and Jean Pauphilet
• Abstract summary: We propose an adherence-aware optimization framework to capture the dichotomy between the recommended and the implemented policy. We show that overlooking the partial adherence phenomenon, as is currently being done by most recommendation engines, can lead to arbitrarily severe performance deterioration. Our framework also provides useful tools to analyze the structure and to compute optimal recommendation policies that are naturally immune against such human deviations.
• Score: 4.6789662847602065
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Many high-stake decisions follow an expert-in-loop structure in that a human operator receives recommendations from an algorithm but is the ultimate decision maker. Hence, the algorithm's recommendation may differ from the actual decision implemented in practice. However, most algorithmic recommendations are obtained by solving an optimization problem that assumes recommendations will be perfectly implemented. We propose an adherence-aware optimization framework to capture the dichotomy between the recommended and the implemented policy and analyze the impact of partial adherence on the optimal recommendation. We show that overlooking the partial adherence phenomenon, as is currently being done by most recommendation engines, can lead to arbitrarily severe performance deterioration, compared with both the current human baseline performance and what is expected by the recommendation algorithm. Our framework also provides useful tools to analyze the structure and to compute optimal recommendation policies that are naturally immune against such human deviations, and are guaranteed to improve upon the baseline policy.

Related papers

• Reason4Rec: Large Language Models for Recommendation with Deliberative User Preference Alignment [69.11529841118671]
  We propose a new Deliberative Recommendation task, which incorporates explicit reasoning about user preferences as an additional alignment goal. We then introduce the Reasoning-powered Recommender framework for deliberative user preference alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T07:17:54Z)
• Balancing Optimality and Diversity: Human-Centered Decision Making through Generative Curation [6.980546503227467]
  Operational decisions in healthcare, logistics, and public policy increasingly involve algorithms that recommend candidate solutions, while leaving the final choice to human decision-makers.<n>We propose generative curation, a framework that optimally generates recommendation sets when desirability depends on both observable objectives and unobserved qualitative considerations.<n>Our framework provides decision-makers with a principled way to design algorithms that complement, rather than replace, human judgment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T20:13:32Z)
• Learning Joint Models of Prediction and Optimization [56.04498536842065]
  Predict-Then-Then framework uses machine learning models to predict unknown parameters of an optimization problem from features before solving. This paper proposes an alternative method, in which optimal solutions are learned directly from the observable features by joint predictive models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-07T19:52:14Z)
• 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)
• Towards Efficient Exact Optimization of Language Model Alignment [93.39181634597877]
  Direct preference optimization (DPO) was proposed to directly optimize the policy from preference data. We show that DPO derived based on the optimal solution of problem leads to a compromised mean-seeking approximation of the optimal solution in practice. We propose efficient exact optimization (EXO) of the alignment objective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T18:51:54Z)
• Pessimistic Off-Policy Multi-Objective Optimization [22.525654101072252]
  We study offline optimization of multi-objective policies from data collected by an existing policy. We propose a pessimistic estimator for the multi-objective policy values that can be easily plugged into existing formulas for hypervolume computation and optimized.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T06:50:15Z)
• Rate-Optimal Policy Optimization for Linear Markov Decision Processes [65.5958446762678]
  We obtain rate-optimal $widetilde O (sqrt K)$ regret where $K$ denotes the number of episodes. Our work is the first to establish the optimal (w.r.t.$K$) rate of convergence in the setting with bandit feedback. No algorithm with an optimal rate guarantee is currently known.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T15:16:09Z)
• 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)
• Off-Policy Evaluation with Policy-Dependent Optimization Response [90.28758112893054]
  We develop a new framework for off-policy evaluation with a textitpolicy-dependent linear optimization response. We construct unbiased estimators for the policy-dependent estimand by a perturbation method. We provide a general algorithm for optimizing causal interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-25T20:25:37Z)
• Bayesian Persuasion for Algorithmic Recourse [28.586165301962485]
  In some situations, the underlying predictive model is deliberately kept secret to avoid gaming. This opacity forces the decision subjects to rely on incomplete information when making strategic feature modifications. We capture such settings as a game of Bayesian persuasion, in which the decision-maker sends a signal, e.g., an action recommendation, to a decision subject to incentivize them to take desirable actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-12T17:18:54Z)
• Understanding the Effect of Stochasticity in Policy Optimization [86.7574122154668]
  We show that the preferability of optimization methods depends critically on whether exact gradients are used. Second, to explain these findings we introduce the concept of committal rate for policy optimization. Third, we show that in the absence of external oracle information, there is an inherent trade-off between exploiting geometry to accelerate convergence versus achieving optimality almost surely.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-29T06:35:44Z)
• On the Optimality of Batch Policy Optimization Algorithms [106.89498352537682]
  Batch policy optimization considers leveraging existing data for policy construction before interacting with an environment. We show that any confidence-adjusted index algorithm is minimax optimal, whether it be optimistic, pessimistic or neutral. We introduce a new weighted-minimax criterion that considers the inherent difficulty of optimal value prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-06T05:23:20Z)

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.