Partial Fairness Awareness: Belief-Guided Strategic Mechanism for Strategic Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.00826v1
• Date: Sat, 30 May 2026 17:53:43 GMT
• Title: Partial Fairness Awareness: Belief-Guided Strategic Mechanism for Strategic Agents
• Abstract summary: We propose the problem of partial fairness awareness (PFA)<n>We introduce a belief-guided strategic mechanism, wherein agents iteratively interact with the decision system and maintain a belief distribution over the candidate set of fairness constraints.<n>This belief-guided process enables agents, through iterative interaction and feedback, to update their belief distribution over the candidate set, thereby gradually aligning their belief with the grounding fairness constraint employed by the system.
• Score: 23.40393298376199
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Strategic machine learning investigates scenarios where agents manipulate their features to receive favorable decisions from predictive models. To address fairness concerns intrinsic to strategic classification, recent work has introduced group-specific fairness constraints. However, current fairness-aware approaches face a fundamental dilemma in the issue of fairness exposure: making these constraints public enables strategic manipulation and can lead to fairness reversal, while keeping them hidden may reduce social welfare and discourage genuine improvement. To fill this gap, we subsequently propose the problem of partial fairness awareness (PFA), as our theoretical analysis informs that such a dilemma can be mitigated by releasing the candidate set of fairness constraints and concealing the grounding constraint. To be specific, we introduce a belief-guided strategic mechanism, wherein agents iteratively interact with the decision system and maintain a belief distribution over the candidate set of fairness constraints. This belief-guided process enables agents, through iterative interaction and feedback, to update their belief distribution over the candidate set, thereby gradually aligning their belief with the grounding fairness constraint employed by the system. Extensive experiments on real-world and synthetic datasets demonstrate that PFA achieves lower group fairness gaps, higher acceptance of truly qualified individuals, and more stable outcomes compared to fully public or private fairness regimes.

Related papers

• Beyond Independent Manipulation: Individual Fairness-aware Strategic Classification with Peer Imitation [44.485292101066115]
  We introduce individual fairness-aware strategic classification (IFSC), a framework that models peer-driven manipulation arising from individual fairness.<n>IFSC characterizes strategic manipulation as similarity-based imitation toward visible accepted peers.<n>Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that IFSC improves individual-fairness consistency and mitigates imitation-induced distortions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-30T17:54:37Z)
• Beyond Rational Illusion: Behaviorally Realistic Strategic Classification [56.458581740660236]
  We propose the Prospect-Guided Strategic Framework (Pro-SF) to address the behaviorally realistic strategic classification problem.<n>Pro-SF is a principled framework grounded in prospect theory to model and learn under behaviorally realistic strategic responses.<n> Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets establish Pro-SF as a behaviorally grounded approach to strategic classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-19T11:04:55Z)
• Post-hoc Provider Fairness Adaptation via Hierarchical Exposure Alignment [54.58748721533078]
  Post-hoc Fairness Adaptation (PFA) is a lightweight framework that equips a frozen recommender with a fairness adapter.<n>It learns personalized additive score adjustments from user-item embeddings to steer provider exposure toward fairness.<n>PFA achieves substantial fairness gains with negligible accuracy loss, consistently outperforming strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-02T16:32:52Z)
• First-See-Then-Design: A Multi-Stakeholder View for Optimal Performance-Fairness Trade-Offs [7.450890746650866]
  We propose a multi-stakeholder framework for fair algorithmic decision-making grounded in welfare economics and distributive justice.<n>We formulate fair decision-making as a post-hoc multi-objective optimization problem.<n>We empirically demonstrate that simple policies can yield superior performance-fairness trade-offs by leveraging outcome uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-15T16:15:25Z)
• Toward a Sustainable Federated Learning Ecosystem: A Practical Least Core Mechanism for Payoff Allocation [71.86087908416255]
  We introduce a payoff allocation framework based on the least core (LC) concept.<n>Unlike traditional methods, the LC prioritizes the cohesion of the federation by minimizing the maximum dissatisfaction.<n>Case studies in federated intrusion detection demonstrate that our mechanism correctly identifies pivotal contributors and strategic alliances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T11:10:50Z)
• Learning Fair Representations with Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks [0.08594140167290099]
  Predictive models often exhibit discriminatory behavior towards marginalized groups.<n>Existing fair learning models aim to mitigate bias, but achieving an optimal trade-off between fairness and accuracy remains a challenge.<n>We propose integrating Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs) within a fair adversarial learning framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-14T07:51:56Z)
• Fairness-Aware Reinforcement Learning (FAReL): A Framework for Transparent and Balanced Sequential Decision-Making [41.53741129864172]
  Equity in real-world sequential decision problems can be enforced using fairness-aware methods.<n>We propose a framework where multiple trade-offs can be explored.<n>We show that our framework learns policies that are more fair across multiple scenarios, with only minor loss in performance reward.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T11:42:14Z)
• Identifying and Mitigating Social Bias Knowledge in Language Models [52.52955281662332]
  We propose a novel debiasing approach, Fairness Stamp (FAST), which enables fine-grained calibration of individual social biases.<n>FAST surpasses state-of-the-art baselines with superior debiasing performance.<n>This highlights the potential of fine-grained debiasing strategies to achieve fairness in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-07T17:14:58Z)
• Social Diversity Reduces the Complexity and Cost of Fostering Fairness [63.70639083665108]
  We investigate the effects of interference mechanisms which assume incomplete information and flexible standards of fairness. We quantify the role of diversity and show how it reduces the need for information gathering. Our results indicate that diversity changes and opens up novel mechanisms available to institutions wishing to promote fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-18T21:58:35Z)
• Monotonic Improvement Guarantees under Non-stationarity for Decentralized PPO [66.5384483339413]
  We present a new monotonic improvement guarantee for optimizing decentralized policies in cooperative Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) We show that a trust region constraint can be effectively enforced in a principled way by bounding independent ratios based on the number of agents in training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-31T20:39:48Z)
• Unfairness Despite Awareness: Group-Fair Classification with Strategic Agents [37.31138342300617]
  We show that strategic agents may possess both the ability and the incentive to manipulate an observed feature vector in order to attain a more favorable outcome. We further demonstrate that both the increased selectiveness of the fair classifier, and consequently the loss of fairness, arises when performing fair learning on domains in which the advantaged group is overrepresented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-06T02:42:43Z)
• Multi-Stage Decentralized Matching Markets: Uncertain Preferences and Strategic Behaviors [91.3755431537592]
  This article develops a framework for learning optimal strategies in real-world matching markets. We show that there exists a welfare-versus-fairness trade-off that is characterized by the uncertainty level of acceptance. We prove that participants can be better off with multi-stage matching compared to single-stage matching.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-13T19:25:52Z)

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.