Discretionary Trees: Understanding Street-Level Bureaucracy via Machine Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.10694v1
• Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2023 12:08:09 GMT
• Title: Discretionary Trees: Understanding Street-Level Bureaucracy via Machine Learning
• Authors: Gaurab Pokharel, Sanmay Das, Patrick J. Fowler
• Abstract summary: We use machine learning techniques to understand street-level bureaucrats' behavior. We theorize that the decisions not captured by the simple decision rules can be considered applications of caseworker discretion.
• Score: 11.74020933567308
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Street-level bureaucrats interact directly with people on behalf of government agencies to perform a wide range of functions, including, for example, administering social services and policing. A key feature of street-level bureaucracy is that the civil servants, while tasked with implementing agency policy, are also granted significant discretion in how they choose to apply that policy in individual cases. Using that discretion could be beneficial, as it allows for exceptions to policies based on human interactions and evaluations, but it could also allow biases and inequities to seep into important domains of societal resource allocation. In this paper, we use machine learning techniques to understand street-level bureaucrats' behavior. We leverage a rich dataset that combines demographic and other information on households with information on which homelessness interventions they were assigned during a period when assignments were not formulaic. We find that caseworker decisions in this time are highly predictable overall, and some, but not all of this predictivity can be captured by simple decision rules. We theorize that the decisions not captured by the simple decision rules can be considered applications of caseworker discretion. These discretionary decisions are far from random in both the characteristics of such households and in terms of the outcomes of the decisions. Caseworkers typically only apply discretion to households that would be considered less vulnerable. When they do apply discretion to assign households to more intensive interventions, the marginal benefits to those households are significantly higher than would be expected if the households were chosen at random; there is no similar reduction in marginal benefit to households that are discretionarily allocated less intensive interventions, suggesting that caseworkers are improving outcomes using their knowledge.

Related papers

• Budgeting Discretion: Theory and Evidence on Street-Level Decision-Making [10.816276884713611]
  We propose a principled model of how discretion should be rationed over time under real operational constraints.<n>We show that overrides follow a dynamic threshold rule: use discretion only when the opportunity exceeds a time and budget-dependent cutoff.<n>These results suggest that discretion can be both procedurally constrained and welfare-improving when treated as an explicitly budgeted resource.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T18:02:14Z)
• Criticality and Safety Margins for Reinforcement Learning [53.10194953873209]
  We seek to define a criticality framework with both a quantifiable ground truth and a clear significance to users. We introduce true criticality as the expected drop in reward when an agent deviates from its policy for n consecutive random actions. We also introduce the concept of proxy criticality, a low-overhead metric that has a statistically monotonic relationship to true criticality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T21:00:45Z)
• Reduced-Rank Multi-objective Policy Learning and Optimization [57.978477569678844]
  In practice, causal researchers do not have a single outcome in mind a priori. In government-assisted social benefit programs, policymakers collect many outcomes to understand the multidimensional nature of poverty. We present a data-driven dimensionality-reduction methodology for multiple outcomes in the context of optimal policy learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T08:16:30Z)
• The Relative Value of Prediction in Algorithmic Decision Making [0.0]
  We ask: What is the relative value of prediction in algorithmic decision making? We identify simple, sharp conditions determining the relative value of prediction vis-a-vis expanding access. We illustrate how these theoretical insights may be used to guide the design of algorithmic decision making systems in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-13T20:52:45Z)
• Policy Learning with Distributional Welfare [1.0742675209112622]
  Most literature on treatment choice has considered utilitarian welfare based on the conditional average treatment effect (ATE) This paper proposes an optimal policy that allocates the treatment based on the conditional quantile of individual treatment effects (QoTE)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-27T14:51:30Z)
• Inference for relative sparsity [0.0]
  We develop inference for the relative sparsity objective function, because characterizing uncertainty is crucial to applications in medicine. Inference is difficult, because the relative sparsity objective depends on the unpenalized value function, which is unstable and has infinite estimands in the binary action case. To tackle these issues, we nest a weighted Trust Region Policy Optimization function within a relative sparsity objective, implement an adaptive relative sparsity penalty, and propose a sample-splitting framework for post-selection inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-25T17:14:45Z)
• Causal Fairness for Outcome Control [68.12191782657437]
  We study a specific decision-making task called outcome control in which an automated system aims to optimize an outcome variable $Y$ while being fair and equitable. In this paper, we first analyze through causal lenses the notion of benefit, which captures how much a specific individual would benefit from a positive decision. We then note that the benefit itself may be influenced by the protected attribute, and propose causal tools which can be used to analyze this.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T09:31:18Z)
• Long-term dynamics of fairness: understanding the impact of data-driven targeted help on job seekers [1.357291726431012]
  We use an approach that combines statistics and machine learning to assess long-term fairness effects of labor market interventions. We develop and use a model to investigate the impact of decisions caused by a public employment authority that selectively supports job-seekers. We conclude that in order to quantify the trade-off correctly and to assess the long-term fairness effects of such a system in the real-world, careful modeling of the surrounding labor market is indispensable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-17T12:03:23Z)
• Inverse Online Learning: Understanding Non-Stationary and Reactionary Policies [79.60322329952453]
  We show how to develop interpretable representations of how agents make decisions. By understanding the decision-making processes underlying a set of observed trajectories, we cast the policy inference problem as the inverse to this online learning problem. We introduce a practical algorithm for retrospectively estimating such perceived effects, alongside the process through which agents update them. Through application to the analysis of UNOS organ donation acceptance decisions, we demonstrate that our approach can bring valuable insights into the factors that govern decision processes and how they change over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-14T17:40:42Z)
• Learning to be Fair: A Consequentialist Approach to Equitable Decision-Making [21.152377319502705]
  We present an alternative framework for designing equitable algorithms. In our approach, one first elicits stakeholder preferences over the space of possible decisions. We then optimize over the space of decision policies, making trade-offs in a way that maximizes the elicited utility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-18T00:30:43Z)
• 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)
• Privacy-Constrained Policies via Mutual Information Regularized Policy Gradients [54.98496284653234]
  We consider the task of training a policy that maximizes reward while minimizing disclosure of certain sensitive state variables through the actions. We solve this problem by introducing a regularizer based on the mutual information between the sensitive state and the actions. We develop a model-based estimator for optimization of privacy-constrained policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-30T03:22:35Z)

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.