Machine Learning as Performative Materialist Practice: Thirteen Theses on the Epistemology, Methodology, and Politics of Applied ML

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.21785v1
• Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 22:24:34 GMT
• Title: Machine Learning as Performative Materialist Practice: Thirteen Theses on the Epistemology, Methodology, and Politics of Applied ML
• Abstract summary: We argue that machine learning models are best understood as temporally situated compressions that function as instruments of intervention.<n>We show how these prescriptions unify several practical prescriptions.
• Score: 45.88028371034407
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Machine learning practice in institutional decision-support contexts -- government, public policy, public health, criminal justice, resource allocation -- rests on a set of largely unexamined epistemological commitments inherited from classical statistics and computer science: that models represent stable regularities, that validation can be context-free, that performance metrics are politically neutral, and that feature importance reveals system structure. This paper challenges these commitments through a unified framework of performative materialist ML, articulated as thirteen theses. Drawing on Pickering's cybernetic ontology, the performativity literature from economic sociology (Callon, MacKenzie), Simon's bounded rationality, the formalization of performative prediction (Perdomo et al., 2020), and fifteen years of applied ML experience in government and public policy, we argue that: (1) ML models are best understood not as truth-seeking representations but as temporally situated compressions that function as instruments of intervention; (2) the full data product is a complex adaptive system that coevolves with its target and navigates a multi-objective space no single algorithm can optimize; (3) validity is fundamentally performative, measured by effects in the world rather than formal properties of the model; (4) the choices embedded in objective functions, fairness criteria, and resource thresholds are political decisions belonging to stakeholders, not technicians. We show how these theses unify several practical prescriptions -- temporal cross-validation, precision and recall at k, pipeline-aware fairness auditing, satisficing over optimizing -- as consequences of a coherent materialist epistemology rather than isolated best practices

Related papers

• Do LLMs Have Values? A Quantitative Analysis and Alignment Framework for Values in Large Language Models [49.45276299939287]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly handle complex subjective tasks.<n>LLMs fluctuate unpredictably under minor wording changes.<n> resolving this duality is critical for reliable AI alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T03:35:04Z)
• Measuring What AI Systems Might Do: Towards A Measurement Science in AI [19.687397197326817]
  capabilities, propensities, skills, values, and abilities are routinely used interchangeably and conflated with observable performance.<n>We argue that capabilities and propensities are dispositional properties - stable features of systems characterised by counterfactual relationships.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T12:59:41Z)
• Towards the Formalization of a Trustworthy AI for Mining Interpretable Models explOiting Sophisticated Algorithms [4.587316936127635]
  Interpretable-by-design models are crucial for fostering trust, accountability, and safe adoption of automated decision-making models in real-world applications.<n>We formalize a comprehensive methodology for generating predictive models that balance interpretability with performance.<n>By evaluating ethical measures during model generation, this framework establishes the theoretical foundations for developing AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-23T14:54:33Z)
• From Physics to Machine Learning and Back: Part II - Learning and Observational Bias in PHM [52.64097278841485]
  Review examines how incorporating learning and observational biases through physics-informed modeling and data strategies can guide models toward physically consistent and reliable predictions.<n>Fast adaptation methods including meta-learning and few-shot learning are reviewed alongside domain generalization techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:15:43Z)
• PEIRCE: Unifying Material and Formal Reasoning via LLM-Driven Neuro-Symbolic Refinement [13.042323420379187]
  PEIRCE is a neuro-symbolic framework designed to unify material and formal inference through an iterative conjecture-criticism process.<n>We demonstrate its capabilities in the domain of natural language explanation generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-05T09:04:47Z)
• Analyzing Fairness of Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing Models [1.0923877073891446]
  This research utilizes two fairness libraries, Fairlearn by Microsoft and AIF360 by IBM.<n>The study focuses on assessing and mitigating biases for unstructured datasets using Computer Vision (CV) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) models.<n>Results reveal that some sequential applications improve the performance of mitigation algorithms by effectively reducing bias while maintaining the model's performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-13T06:35:55Z)
• Analyzing Fairness of Classification Machine Learning Model with Structured Dataset [1.0923877073891446]
  This study investigates the fairness of machine learning models applied to structured datasets in classification tasks.<n>Three fairness libraries; Fairlearn by Microsoft, AIF360 by IBM, and the What If Tool by Google were employed.<n>The research aims to assess the extent of bias in the ML models, compare the effectiveness of these libraries, and derive actionable insights for practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-13T06:31:09Z)
• Political-LLM: Large Language Models in Political Science [159.95299889946637]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted in political science tasks.<n>Political-LLM aims to advance the comprehensive understanding of integrating LLMs into computational political science.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T08:47:50Z)
• Between Randomness and Arbitrariness: Some Lessons for Reliable Machine Learning at Scale [2.50194939587674]
  dissertation: quantifying and mitigating sources of arbitiness in ML, randomness in uncertainty estimation and optimization algorithms, in order to achieve scalability without sacrificing reliability. dissertation serves as an empirical proof by example that research on reliable measurement for machine learning is intimately bound up with research in law and policy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T19:29:37Z)
• Explaining by Imitating: Understanding Decisions by Interpretable Policy Learning [72.80902932543474]
  Understanding human behavior from observed data is critical for transparency and accountability in decision-making. Consider real-world settings such as healthcare, in which modeling a decision-maker's policy is challenging. We propose a data-driven representation of decision-making behavior that inheres transparency by design, accommodates partial observability, and operates completely offline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T13:06:14Z)
• Causal Fairness Analysis [68.12191782657437]
  We introduce a framework for understanding, modeling, and possibly solving issues of fairness in decision-making settings. The main insight of our approach will be to link the quantification of the disparities present on the observed data with the underlying, and often unobserved, collection of causal mechanisms. Our effort culminates in the Fairness Map, which is the first systematic attempt to organize and explain the relationship between different criteria found in the literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-23T01:06:34Z)
• Causal Feature Selection for Algorithmic Fairness [61.767399505764736]
  We consider fairness in the integration component of data management. We propose an approach to identify a sub-collection of features that ensure the fairness of the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-10T20:20:10Z)

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.