Estimating Misreporting in the Presence of Genuine Modification: A Causal Perspective

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23954v1
• Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 19:06:30 GMT
• Title: Estimating Misreporting in the Presence of Genuine Modification: A Causal Perspective
• Abstract summary: In settings where ML models are used to inform the allocation of resources, agents might have an incentive to strategically change their features to secure better outcomes.<n>We propose a causally-motivated approach to identify and quantify how much an agent misreports on average by distinguishing deceptive changes in their features from genuine modification.
• Score: 11.438018798893113
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In settings where ML models are used to inform the allocation of resources, agents affected by the allocation decisions might have an incentive to strategically change their features to secure better outcomes. While prior work has studied strategic responses broadly, disentangling misreporting from genuine modification remains a fundamental challenge. In this paper, we propose a causally-motivated approach to identify and quantify how much an agent misreports on average by distinguishing deceptive changes in their features from genuine modification. Our key insight is that, unlike genuine modification, misreported features do not causally affect downstream variables (i.e., causal descendants). We exploit this asymmetry by comparing the causal effect of misreported features on their causal descendants as derived from manipulated datasets against those from unmanipulated datasets. We formally prove identifiability of the misreporting rate and characterize the variance of our estimator. We empirically validate our theoretical results using a semi-synthetic and real Medicare dataset with misreported data, demonstrating that our approach can be employed to identify misreporting in real-world scenarios.

Related papers

• Detecting Changes in Causal Dependence with Kernels and Copulas [1.8707139489039097]
  In financial markets, the effect of a market indicator on asset returns may causally change over time.<n>We introduce a quantity based on the integrated difference between kernel mean embeddings of certain conditionals copula.<n>A near-linear time estimator for the quantity is proposed, with rates of convergence explicitly spelled out.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T07:46:13Z)
• Compared to What? Baselines and Metrics for Counterfactual Prompting [39.56472929066589]
  We observe prediction flip rates on MedQA of 14.9% when we surgically change patient gender.<n>We propose a framework in which we compare differences observed under target interventions to those induced by paraphrasing inputs.<n>We find that these effects largely dissipate when we account for general model sensitivity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-01T19:23:33Z)
• Proxy-Guided Measurement Calibration [7.842603902533572]
  We study the problem of outcome miscalibration and propose a framework guided by proxy variables for estimating and correcting the systematic errors.<n>We model the data-generating process using a causal graph that separates latent content variables driving the true outcome from the latent bias variables that induce systematic errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-10T07:15:02Z)
• Data Fusion for Partial Identification of Causal Effects [62.56890808004615]
  We propose a novel partial identification framework that enables researchers to answer key questions.<n>Is the causal effect positive or negative? and How severe must assumption violations be to overturn this conclusion?<n>We apply our framework to the Project STAR study, which investigates the effect of classroom size on students' third-grade standardized test performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T07:13:01Z)
• Do Finetti: On Causal Effects for Exchangeable Data [45.96632286841583]
  We study causal effect estimation in a setting where the data are not i.i.d. We focus on exchangeable data satisfying an assumption of independent causal mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T07:31:18Z)
• Automating the Selection of Proxy Variables of Unmeasured Confounders [16.773841751009748]
  We extend the existing proxy variable estimator to accommodate scenarios where multiple unmeasured confounders exist between the treatments and the outcome. We propose two data-driven methods for the selection of proxy variables and for the unbiased estimation of causal effects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T08:53:49Z)
• The Impact of Differential Feature Under-reporting on Algorithmic Fairness [86.275300739926]
  We present an analytically tractable model of differential feature under-reporting. We then use to characterize the impact of this kind of data bias on algorithmic fairness. Our results show that, in real world data settings, under-reporting typically leads to increasing disparities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-16T19:16:22Z)
• Diagnosing and Rectifying Fake OOD Invariance: A Restructured Causal Approach [51.012396632595554]
  Invariant representation learning (IRL) encourages the prediction from invariant causal features to labels de-confounded from the environments. Recent theoretical results verified that some causal features recovered by IRLs merely pretend domain-invariantly in the training environments but fail in unseen domains. We develop an approach based on conditional mutual information with respect to RS-SCM, then rigorously rectify the spurious and fake invariant effects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T12:58:05Z)
• 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)
• Bias in Evaluation Processes: An Optimization-Based Model [31.790546767744917]
  We model an evaluation process as a transformation of a distribution of the true utility of an individual for a task to an observed distribution. We characterize the distributions that arise from our model and study the effect of the parameters on the observed distribution. We empirically validate our model by fitting real-world datasets and use it to study the effect of interventions in a downstream selection task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T15:45:01Z)
• Simultaneous Improvement of ML Model Fairness and Performance by Identifying Bias in Data [1.76179873429447]
  We propose a data preprocessing technique that can detect instances ascribing a specific kind of bias that should be removed from the dataset before training. In particular, we claim that in the problem settings where instances exist with similar feature but different labels caused by variation in protected attributes, an inherent bias gets induced in the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-24T13:04:07Z)
• Leveraging Unlabeled Data to Predict Out-of-Distribution Performance [63.740181251997306]
  Real-world machine learning deployments are characterized by mismatches between the source (training) and target (test) distributions. In this work, we investigate methods for predicting the target domain accuracy using only labeled source data and unlabeled target data. We propose Average Thresholded Confidence (ATC), a practical method that learns a threshold on the model's confidence, predicting accuracy as the fraction of unlabeled examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-11T23:01:12Z)
• Accounting for Unobserved Confounding in Domain Generalization [107.0464488046289]
  This paper investigates the problem of learning robust, generalizable prediction models from a combination of datasets. Part of the challenge of learning robust models lies in the influence of unobserved confounders. We demonstrate the empirical performance of our approach on healthcare data from different modalities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-21T08:18:06Z)
• Nonparametric Feature Impact and Importance [0.6123324869194193]
  We give mathematical definitions of feature impact and importance, derived from partial dependence curves, that operate directly on the data. To assess quality, we show that features ranked by these definitions are competitive with existing feature selection techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-08T17:07:35Z)

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.