Causal Strategic Learning with Competitive Selection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2308.16262v3
• Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2024 22:44:45 GMT
• Title: Causal Strategic Learning with Competitive Selection
• Authors: Kiet Q. H. Vo, Muneeb Aadil, Siu Lun Chau, Krikamol Muandet
• Abstract summary: We study the problem of agent selection in causal strategic learning under multiple decision makers. We show that the optimal selection rule is a trade-off between selecting the best agents and providing incentives to maximise the agents' improvement. We provide a cooperative protocol which all decision makers must collectively adopt to recover the true causal parameters.
• Score: 10.237954203296187
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We study the problem of agent selection in causal strategic learning under multiple decision makers and address two key challenges that come with it. Firstly, while much of prior work focuses on studying a fixed pool of agents that remains static regardless of their evaluations, we consider the impact of selection procedure by which agents are not only evaluated, but also selected. When each decision maker unilaterally selects agents by maximising their own utility, we show that the optimal selection rule is a trade-off between selecting the best agents and providing incentives to maximise the agents' improvement. Furthermore, this optimal selection rule relies on incorrect predictions of agents' outcomes. Hence, we study the conditions under which a decision maker's optimal selection rule will not lead to deterioration of agents' outcome nor cause unjust reduction in agents' selection chance. To that end, we provide an analytical form of the optimal selection rule and a mechanism to retrieve the causal parameters from observational data, under certain assumptions on agents' behaviour. Secondly, when there are multiple decision makers, the interference between selection rules introduces another source of biases in estimating the underlying causal parameters. To address this problem, we provide a cooperative protocol which all decision makers must collectively adopt to recover the true causal parameters. Lastly, we complement our theoretical results with simulation studies. Our results highlight not only the importance of causal modeling as a strategy to mitigate the effect of gaming, as suggested by previous work, but also the need of a benevolent regulator to enable it.

Related papers

• Algorithmic Decision-Making under Agents with Persistent Improvement [9.296248945826084]
  We study algorithmic decision-making under human's strategic behavior. We first develop a dynamic model to characterize persistent improvements. We then study how the decision-maker can design an optimal policy to incentivize the largest improvements inside the agent population.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-03T01:36:35Z)
• 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)
• Pure Exploration under Mediators' Feedback [63.56002444692792]
  Multi-armed bandits are a sequential-decision-making framework, where, at each interaction step, the learner selects an arm and observes a reward. We consider the scenario in which the learner has access to a set of mediators, each of which selects the arms on the agent's behalf according to a and possibly unknown policy. We propose a sequential decision-making strategy for discovering the best arm under the assumption that the mediators' policies are known to the learner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-29T18:18:21Z)
• Rational Decision-Making Agent with Internalized Utility Judgment [91.80700126895927]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable advancements and have attracted significant efforts to develop LLMs into agents capable of executing intricate multi-step decision-making tasks beyond traditional NLP applications. This paper proposes RadAgent, which fosters the development of its rationality through an iterative framework involving Experience Exploration and Utility Learning. Experimental results on the ToolBench dataset demonstrate RadAgent's superiority over baselines, achieving over 10% improvement in Pass Rate on diverse tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-24T03:11:45Z)
• Incentive-Theoretic Bayesian Inference for Collaborative Science [59.15962177829337]
  We study hypothesis testing when there is an agent with a private prior about an unknown parameter. We show how the principal can conduct statistical inference that leverages the information that is revealed by an agent's strategic behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-07T17:59:01Z)
• In Search of Insights, Not Magic Bullets: Towards Demystification of the Model Selection Dilemma in Heterogeneous Treatment Effect Estimation [92.51773744318119]
  This paper empirically investigates the strengths and weaknesses of different model selection criteria. We highlight that there is a complex interplay between selection strategies, candidate estimators and the data used for comparing them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T16:55:37Z)
• Explainability's Gain is Optimality's Loss? -- How Explanations Bias Decision-making [0.0]
  Explanations help to facilitate communication between the algorithm and the human decision-maker. Feature-based explanations' semantics of causal models induce leakage from the decision-maker's prior beliefs. Such differences can lead to sub-optimal and biased decision outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-17T11:43:42Z)
• 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)
• Peer Selection with Noisy Assessments [43.307040330622186]
  We extend PeerNomination, the most accurate peer reviewing algorithm to date, into WeightedPeerNomination. We show analytically that a weighting scheme can improve the overall accuracy of the selection significantly.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-21T14:47:11Z)
• Learning Strategies in Decentralized Matching Markets under Uncertain Preferences [91.3755431537592]
  We study the problem of decision-making in the setting of a scarcity of shared resources when the preferences of agents are unknown a priori. Our approach is based on the representation of preferences in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space. We derive optimal strategies that maximize agents' expected payoffs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-29T03:08:22Z)
• Causal Strategic Linear Regression [5.672132510411465]
  In many predictive decision-making scenarios, such as credit scoring and academic testing, a decision-maker must construct a model that accounts for agents' propensity to "game" the decision rule. We join concurrent work in modeling agents' outcomes as a function of their changeable attributes. We provide efficient algorithms for learning decision rules that optimize three distinct decision-maker objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-24T03:57:22Z)

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.