Rethinking Optimization: A Systems-Based Approach to Social Externalities

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.12825v1
• Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2025 12:14:10 GMT
• Title: Rethinking Optimization: A Systems-Based Approach to Social Externalities
• Authors: Pegah Nokhiz, Aravinda Kanchana Ruwanpathirana, Helen Nissenbaum,
• Abstract summary: It is crucial to first characterize involved stakeholders, their goals, and the types of subpar practices causing unforeseen outcomes.<n>This paper suggests a framework that combines systems thinking with the economic concept of externalities to tackle these challenges.
• Score: 4.189306857837369
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Optimization is widely used for decision making across various domains, valued for its ability to improve efficiency. However, poor implementation practices can lead to unintended consequences, particularly in socioeconomic contexts where externalities (costs or benefits to third parties outside the optimization process) are significant. To propose solutions, it is crucial to first characterize involved stakeholders, their goals, and the types of subpar practices causing unforeseen outcomes. This task is complex because affected stakeholders often fall outside the direct focus of optimization processes. Also, incorporating these externalities into optimization requires going beyond traditional economic frameworks, which often focus on describing externalities but fail to address their normative implications or interconnected nature, and feedback loops. This paper suggests a framework that combines systems thinking with the economic concept of externalities to tackle these challenges. This approach aims to characterize what went wrong, who was affected, and how (or where) to include them in the optimization process. Economic externalities, along with their established quantification methods, assist in identifying "who was affected and how" through stakeholder characterization. Meanwhile, systems thinking (an analytical approach to comprehending relationships in complex systems) provides a holistic, normative perspective. Systems thinking contributes to an understanding of interconnections among externalities, feedback loops, and determining "when" to incorporate them in the optimization. Together, these approaches create a comprehensive framework for addressing optimization's unintended consequences, balancing descriptive accuracy with normative objectives. Using this, we examine three common types of subpar practices: ignorance, error, and prioritization of short-term goals.

Related papers

• Personalized Reasoning: Just-In-Time Personalization and Why LLMs Fail At It [81.50711040539566]
  Current large language model (LLM) development treats task-solving and preference alignment as separate challenges.<n>We introduce PREFDISCO, an evaluation methodology that transforms static benchmarks into interactive personalization tasks.<n>Our framework creates scenarios where identical questions require different reasoning chains depending on user context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T18:55:28Z)
• Learning Recommender Systems with Soft Target: A Decoupled Perspective [49.83787742587449]
  We propose a novel decoupled soft label optimization framework to consider the objectives as two aspects by leveraging soft labels. We present a sensible soft-label generation algorithm that models a label propagation algorithm to explore users' latent interests in unobserved feedback via neighbors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T04:20:15Z)
• Structural Interventions and the Dynamics of Inequality [0.0]
  We show that technical solutions must be paired with external, context-aware interventions to enact social change. This research highlights the ways that structural inequality can be perpetuated by seemingly unbiased decision mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T13:44:38Z)
• 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)
• Collective Counterfactual Explanations: Balancing Individual Goals and Collective Dynamics [13.939959533992871]
  We propose a novel framework that extends standard counterfactual explanations by incorporating a population dynamics model.<n>We show how this approach reframes the counterfactual explanation problem from an individual-centric task to a collective optimization problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T04:39:23Z)
• Benchmarking PtO and PnO Methods in the Predictive Combinatorial Optimization Regime [59.27851754647913]
  Predictive optimization is the precise modeling of many real-world applications, including energy cost-aware scheduling and budget allocation on advertising. We develop a modular framework to benchmark 11 existing PtO/PnO methods on 8 problems, including a new industrial dataset for advertising. Our study shows that PnO approaches are better than PtO on 7 out of 8 benchmarks, but there is no silver bullet found for the specific design choices of PnO.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T13:19:34Z)
• A Survey of Contextual Optimization Methods for Decision Making under Uncertainty [47.73071218563257]
  This review article identifies three main frameworks for learning policies from data and discusses their strengths and limitations. We present the existing models and methods under a uniform notation and terminology and classify them according to the three main frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-17T15:21:02Z)
• 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)
• Optimization's Neglected Normative Commitments [3.3388234549922027]
  A paradigm used to approach potentially high-stakes decisions, optimization relies on abstracting the real world to a set of decision(s), objective(s) and constraint(s) This paper describes the normative choices and assumptions that are necessarily part of using optimization. It then identifies six emergent problems that may be neglected.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-27T12:43:15Z)
• Backpropagation of Unrolled Solvers with Folded Optimization [55.04219793298687]
  The integration of constrained optimization models as components in deep networks has led to promising advances on many specialized learning tasks. One typical strategy is algorithm unrolling, which relies on automatic differentiation through the operations of an iterative solver. This paper provides theoretical insights into the backward pass of unrolled optimization, leading to a system for generating efficiently solvable analytical models of backpropagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-28T01:50:42Z)
• End-to-End Learning and Intervention in Games [60.41921763076017]
  We provide a unified framework for learning and intervention in games. We propose two approaches, respectively based on explicit and implicit differentiation. The analytical results are validated using several real-world problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T18:39:32Z)
• Fair Influence Maximization: A Welfare Optimization Approach [34.39574750992602]
  We provide a principled characterization of the properties that a fair influence algorithm should satisfy. Under this framework, the trade-off between fairness and efficiency can be controlled by a single design aversion parameter. Our framework encompasses as special cases leximin and proportional fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-14T14:08:10Z)
• Causal Bayesian Optimization [8.958125394444679]
  We study the problem of globally optimizing a variable of interest that is part of a causal model in which a sequence of interventions can be performed. Our approach combines ideas from causal inference, uncertainty quantification and sequential decision making. We show how knowing the causal graph significantly improves the ability to reason about optimal decision making strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-24T13:20:50Z)
• Cost-Sensitive Portfolio Selection via Deep Reinforcement Learning [100.73223416589596]
  We propose a cost-sensitive portfolio selection method with deep reinforcement learning. Specifically, a novel two-stream portfolio policy network is devised to extract both price series patterns and asset correlations. A new cost-sensitive reward function is developed to maximize the accumulated return and constrain both costs via reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-06T06:28:17Z)

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.