Model Multiplicity and Predictive Arbitrariness in Recidivism Risk Assessment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.02198v1
• Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2026 12:53:54 GMT
• Title: Model Multiplicity and Predictive Arbitrariness in Recidivism Risk Assessment
• Abstract summary: We study a machine learning-based system for recidivism risk assessment that has been in use for over 15 years.<n>We learn interpretable models that improve predictive performance, reduce error-rate disparities between groups, and ensure that rehabilitative progress lowers risk scores.<n>Our experiments indicate that the existence of many similarly accurate models with comparable error-rate disparities does not necessarily translate into severe predictive multiplicity.
• Score: 1.7465202628859542
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Prediction tasks over individual futures, which are inherently noisy, often admit multiple similarly accurate models. When these models produce different predictions for the same individual, they raise concerns of arbitrariness in decision-making. How severe can this arbitrariness be, in theory and in practice? How can it be resolved to support high-stakes risk assessment? We address these questions through a study of a machine learning-based decision support system for recidivism risk assessment that has been in use for over 15 years. By translating complex legal rules into an algorithm for labeling post release outcomes (recidivist or non-recidivist), we first construct a dataset of thousands of inmate releases. Using this dataset, we learn interpretable models that improve predictive performance, reduce error-rate disparities between groups, and ensure that rehabilitative progress lowers risk scores. Next, we study predictive multiplicity, by first deriving a tight lower bound on the expected predictive agreement of any finite set of models over a dataset, and then by evaluating the extent to which structural diversity (e.g., different model coefficients) within this set translates to predictive multiplicity (i.e., different predictions for the same individual). Our experiments indicate that the existence of many similarly accurate models with comparable error-rate disparities does not necessarily translate into severe predictive multiplicity. Empirically, similarly performant models can exhibit substantially higher predictive agreement than worst-case theoretical guarantees suggest. We find that a simple policy that assigns each inmate the lowest risk among these models is effective for addressing predictive arbitrariness.

Related papers

• Using predictive multiplicity to measure individual performance within the AI Act [8.79823465328347]
  This paper puts predictive multiplicity in context with the EU AI Act's provisions on accuracy.<n>We suggest that information about predictive multiplicity should be made available to deployers under the AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-12T13:40:00Z)
• On Arbitrary Predictions from Equally Valid Models [49.56463611078044]
  Model multiplicity refers to multiple machine learning models that admit conflicting predictions for the same patient.<n>We show that even small ensembles can mitigate/eliminate predictive multiplicity in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T16:15:59Z)
• Predictive Multiplicity in Survival Models: A Method for Quantifying Model Uncertainty in Predictive Maintenance Applications [0.0]
  We frame predictive multiplicity as a critical concern in survival-based models.<n>We introduce formal measures -- ambiguity, discrepancy, and obscurity -- to quantify it.<n>This is particularly relevant for downstream tasks such as maintenance scheduling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-16T15:04:00Z)
• Reconciling Model Multiplicity for Downstream Decision Making [24.335927243672952]
  We show that even when the two predictive models approximately agree on their individual predictions almost everywhere, it is still possible for their induced best-response actions to differ on a substantial portion of the population. We propose a framework that calibrates the predictive models with regard to both the downstream decision-making problem and the individual probability prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T03:36:46Z)
• Structured Radial Basis Function Network: Modelling Diversity for Multiple Hypotheses Prediction [51.82628081279621]
  Multi-modal regression is important in forecasting nonstationary processes or with a complex mixture of distributions. A Structured Radial Basis Function Network is presented as an ensemble of multiple hypotheses predictors for regression problems. It is proved that this structured model can efficiently interpolate this tessellation and approximate the multiple hypotheses target distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T01:27:53Z)
• Predictive Multiplicity in Probabilistic Classification [25.111463701666864]
  We present a framework for measuring predictive multiplicity in probabilistic classification. We demonstrate the incidence and prevalence of predictive multiplicity in real-world tasks. Our results emphasize the need to report predictive multiplicity more widely.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-02T16:25:29Z)
• Test-time Collective Prediction [73.74982509510961]
  Multiple parties in machine learning want to jointly make predictions on future test points. Agents wish to benefit from the collective expertise of the full set of agents, but may not be willing to release their data or model parameters. We explore a decentralized mechanism to make collective predictions at test time, leveraging each agent's pre-trained model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-22T18:29:58Z)
• Characterizing Fairness Over the Set of Good Models Under Selective Labels [69.64662540443162]
  We develop a framework for characterizing predictive fairness properties over the set of models that deliver similar overall performance. We provide tractable algorithms to compute the range of attainable group-level predictive disparities. We extend our framework to address the empirically relevant challenge of selectively labelled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-02T02:11:37Z)
• Trust but Verify: Assigning Prediction Credibility by Counterfactual Constrained Learning [123.3472310767721]
  Prediction credibility measures are fundamental in statistics and machine learning. These measures should account for the wide variety of models used in practice. The framework developed in this work expresses the credibility as a risk-fit trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-24T19:52:38Z)
• Ambiguity in Sequential Data: Predicting Uncertain Futures with Recurrent Models [110.82452096672182]
  We propose an extension of the Multiple Hypothesis Prediction (MHP) model to handle ambiguous predictions with sequential data. We also introduce a novel metric for ambiguous problems, which is better suited to account for uncertainties.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-10T09:15:42Z)

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.