To Give or Not to Give? The Impacts of Strategically Withheld Recourse

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.05891v1
• Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2025 10:36:16 GMT
• Title: To Give or Not to Give? The Impacts of Strategically Withheld Recourse
• Authors: Yatong Chen, Andrew Estornell, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik, Yang Liu,
• Abstract summary: Recourse provides information about the decision process that can be used for more effective strategic manipulation.<n>We show that this tension leads rational utility-maximizing systems to frequently withhold recourse, resulting in decreased population utility.<n>To mitigate these effects, we explore the role of recourse subsidies, finding them effective in increasing the provision of recourse actions by rational systems.
• Score: 30.40274058030976
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Individuals often aim to reverse undesired outcomes in interactions with automated systems, like loan denials, by either implementing system-recommended actions (recourse), or manipulating their features. While providing recourse benefits users and enhances system utility, it also provides information about the decision process that can be used for more effective strategic manipulation, especially when the individuals collectively share such information with each other. We show that this tension leads rational utility-maximizing systems to frequently withhold recourse, resulting in decreased population utility, particularly impacting sensitive groups. To mitigate these effects, we explore the role of recourse subsidies, finding them effective in increasing the provision of recourse actions by rational systems, as well as lowering the potential social cost and mitigating unfairness caused by recourse withholding.

Related papers

• Generative Framework for Personalized Persuasion: Inferring Causal, Counterfactual, and Latent Knowledge [14.324214906731923]
  We create hypothetical scenarios to examine the effects of alternative system responses. We employ causal discovery to identify strategy-level causal relationships among user and system utterances. We optimize policies for selecting system responses based on counterfactual data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-08T15:33:54Z)
• Causal Discovery and Counterfactual Reasoning to Optimize Persuasive Dialogue Policies [14.324214906731923]
  We use causal discovery and counterfactual reasoning to optimize system persuasion capability and outcomes.<n>Our experiments with the PersuasionForGood dataset show measurable improvements in persuasion outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-19T06:06:10Z)
• System-2 Recommenders: Disentangling Utility and Engagement in Recommendation Systems via Temporal Point-Processes [80.97898201876592]
  We propose a generative model in which past content interactions impact the arrival rates of users based on a self-exciting Hawkes process. We show analytically that given samples it is possible to disentangle System-1 and System-2 and allow content optimization based on user utility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T18:19:37Z)
• 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)
• Incentivized Communication for Federated Bandits [67.4682056391551]
  We introduce an incentivized communication problem for federated bandits, where the server shall motivate clients to share data by providing incentives. We propose the first incentivized communication protocol, namely, Inc-FedUCB, that achieves near-optimal regret with provable communication and incentive cost guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-21T00:59:20Z)
• 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)
• Incentivising cooperation by rewarding the weakest member [0.0]
  greedy strategies can reduce the positive outcome for all agents. In complex situations it is far easier to design machine learning objectives for selfish strategies than for equitable behaviors. We show how this yields fairer'' more equitable behavior, while also maximizing individual outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-04T14:03:37Z)
• GAC: A Deep Reinforcement Learning Model Toward User Incentivization in Unknown Social Networks [3.3946853660795884]
  We propose an end-to-end reinforcement learning-based framework, named Geometric Actor-Critic (GAC), to discover effective incentive allocation policies. We use three real-world social network datasets to evaluate the performance of the proposed GAC.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-17T19:41:49Z)
• Identifying Influential Users in Unknown Social Networks for Adaptive Incentive Allocation Under Budget Restriction [24.793013471521924]
  Incentivization has been proven to be a more proactive way to affect users' behaviors. We propose a novel algorithm for exploring influential users in unknown networks. We design an adaptive incentive allocation approach that determines incentive values based on users' preferences and their influence ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-13T11:20:10Z)
• Overcoming Failures of Imagination in AI Infused System Development and Deployment [71.9309995623067]
  NeurIPS 2020 requested that research paper submissions include impact statements on "potential nefarious uses and the consequences of failure" We argue that frameworks of harms must be context-aware and consider a wider range of potential stakeholders, system affordances, as well as viable proxies for assessing harms in the widest sense.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-26T18:09:52Z)

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.