pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19674 · v1 · pith:IFBFEWMInew · submitted 2026-05-19 · 💻 cs.AI

Beyond Rational Illusion: Behaviorally Realistic Strategic Classification

Xinpeng Lv , Yunxin Mao , Renzhe Xu , Chunyuan Zheng , Yikai Chen , Haoxuan Li , Yang Shi , Jinxuan Yang
show 6 more authors
Zhouchen Lin Yuanlong Chen Yuanxing Zhang Shaowu Yang Wenjing Yang Haotian Wang
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 05:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords strategic classificationprospect theorybehavioral economicscognitive biasesStackelberg gamefeature manipulationmachine learning
0
0 comments X

The pith

Strategic classification becomes behaviorally realistic when prospect theory replaces the assumption of perfect agent rationality.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper defines a new problem setting in which agents manipulate features using cognitive biases rather than strict rationality. It introduces the Prospect-Guided Strategic Framework that embeds three prospect-theory mechanisms into the classic Stackelberg interaction between agents and a decision maker. A sympathetic reader cares because models built on pure rationality will mis-predict behavior and produce unreliable decisions once deployed against actual people. The work therefore connects machine-learning practice directly to findings from behavioral economics.

Core claim

We formalize the behaviorally realistic strategic classification problem, where agents' strategic manipulations deviate from full rationality due to psychological biases, and propose the Prospect-Guided Strategic Framework (Pro-SF) that reformulates the Stackelberg-style interaction by incorporating the asymmetry between benefits and costs, different subjective reference points, and non-rational probability distortion.

What carries the argument

Prospect-Guided Strategic Framework (Pro-SF), which augments the standard Stackelberg game between agents and decision-maker with three prospect-theory mechanisms to capture biased strategic responses.

If this is right

  • Models trained with Pro-SF will produce more accurate predictions of how real agents will alter their features to game a classifier.
  • Decision systems in lending, hiring, or admissions will achieve higher reliability once behavioral biases are modeled explicitly.
  • The framework supplies a concrete way to move strategic classification from idealized game theory toward empirical behavioral data.
  • Performance gains on both synthetic and real-world datasets indicate that the added mechanisms translate into measurable improvements in deployment settings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same three mechanisms could be tested in other interactive learning settings such as recommender systems or dynamic pricing where rationality assumptions are known to be fragile.
  • Live A/B tests with actual users would provide a direct check on whether the prospect-theory adjustments generalize beyond the paper's offline experiments.
  • Ignoring these biases may produce not only inaccurate but also systematically unfair outcomes when automated decisions affect populations whose reference points differ from the model's assumptions.

Load-bearing premise

The three prospect theory mechanisms of benefit-cost asymmetry, subjective reference points, and probability distortion sufficiently capture real deviations from rationality and can be directly inserted into the Stackelberg interaction.

What would settle it

A controlled experiment or field study in which agents' observed feature manipulations deviate systematically from the predictions of the modified Stackelberg interaction that uses the three prospect-theory mechanisms would falsify the central modeling claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19674 by Chunyuan Zheng, Haotian Wang, Haoxuan Li, Jinxuan Yang, Renzhe Xu, Shaowu Yang, Wenjing Yang, Xinpeng Lv, Yang Shi, Yikai Chen, Yuanlong Chen, Yuanxing Zhang, Yunxin Mao, Zhouchen Lin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustrative real-life scenarios of behavioral biases: (a) financial investment shaped by loss aversion, (b) credit scoring influenced by reference bias, and (c) disease screening affected by probability distortion. • Example 2. In credit scoring (Banerji et al., 2020), con￾sider loan approval requires applicants to exceed a thresh￾old A. Those whose subjective reference point B is just below A tend to mak… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Illustration of two failure modes induced by the rational-agent assumption. (a) Over-defense caused by agents giving up manipulation. (b) Under-defense caused by excessive manipulation. (c) Effects of cumulative behavioral deviations on a rational-based classifier (Los. = loss aversion, Refe. = reference bias, Prob. = probability distortion). Under-defense leaves parts of the manipulated feature space unpr… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: From rational to behaviorally realistic modeling: Pro-SF reformulates agent realistic behavior and provides robust outcomes. probability weighting function: w(p) = p γ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Parameter ablation results with parameters (α, β, κ, γ) and r ∈ {0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8}. 2.0 2.25 2.5 2.75 (loss parameter) 75.8 76.0 76.2 76.4 Accuracy (%) ( = 0.8, = 0.7) =0.65 =0.70 =0.80 (a) r∈ {0, 0.3, 0.6, 0.9} 2.0 2.25 2.5 2.75 (loss parameter) 75.8 76.0 76.2 76.4 Accuracy (%) ( = 0.8, = 0.7) =0.65 =0.70 =0.80 (b) r ∈ {0, 0.4, 0.7} 2.0 2.25 2.5 2.75 (loss parameter) 75.8 76.0 76.2 76.4 Accuracy (%) … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Parameter ablation results with parameters κ, γ, r with different (α, β). some fluctuations in performance, but are all better than the rational classifier. Finally, different curvature settings (α, β) yield consistent results, confirming that Pro-SF maintains effectiveness under diverse utility shapes. 7. Conclusion This work challenges the classical rational-agent assump￾tion in strategic classification … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Parameter ablation results with parameters κ, γ, r with different (α, β). H. Validation with Real World Manipulation Data In this section, we provide further empirical support for our behavioral modeling. Recent work (Ebrahimi et al., 2025) conducted controlled human-subject experiments across several strategic-classification scenarios (e.g., hiring, medical decision-making). Their statistical findings sho… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Strategic classification(SC) studies the interaction between decision models and agents who strategically manipulate their features for favorable outcomes. Existing SC frameworks typically rely on the idealized assumption that agents are strictly rational. However, evidence from behavioral economics and psychology consistently shows that real-world decision-making is often shaped by cognitive biases, deviating from pure rationality. To formalize this limitation, we identify and define a new problem setting, termed the behaviorally realistic strategic classification problem, where agents' strategic manipulations deviate from full rationality due to psychological biases. Motivated by the identified limitation, we propose the Prospect-Guided Strategic Framework (Pro-SF) to address the problem, a principled framework grounded in prospect theory to model and learn under behaviorally realistic strategic responses. Specifically, to capture behaviorally realistic strategic manipulations, our framework reformulates the Stackelberg-style interaction between agents and the decision-maker by incorporating three key mechanisms inspired by prospect theory, including the asymmetry between benefits and costs, different subjective reference points, and non-rational probability distortion. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets establish Pro-SF as a behaviorally grounded approach to strategic classification, bridging machine learning and behavioral economics for more reliable deployment in the real world.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper identifies the 'behaviorally realistic strategic classification' problem, in which agents deviate from full rationality in feature manipulation due to cognitive biases. It proposes the Prospect-Guided Strategic Framework (Pro-SF) that reformulates the Stackelberg interaction between agents and the decision-maker by incorporating three prospect-theory mechanisms: asymmetry between benefits and costs, subjective reference points, and non-rational probability distortion. The framework is evaluated through experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work would usefully bridge strategic classification with behavioral economics by providing a principled way to model realistic agent responses. Grounding the model in prospect theory and testing on both synthetic and real data are positive features that could support more reliable deployment of strategic classifiers.

major comments (2)
  1. [Framework] Framework section: the manuscript introduces two additional scalar parameters (subjective reference points and probability distortion factors) to capture the three prospect-theory mechanisms but provides no identification argument or recovery procedure showing these parameters can be uniquely estimated from observed manipulation data rather than chosen by the modeler. Without such an argument the framework risks reducing to a flexible parametric extension whose gains may be driven by extra degrees of freedom.
  2. [Framework] Equilibrium analysis: the claim that the modified best-response function still yields a well-defined Stackelberg equilibrium that the decision-maker can optimize against is stated at a high level but lacks a formal derivation or existence proof once the prospect-theory adjustments are inserted. This is load-bearing for the central modeling claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a brief statement of the quantitative metrics and baselines used in the experiments to allow readers to gauge the magnitude of improvement.
  2. [Preliminaries] Notation for the value function and weighting function should be introduced explicitly with references to the original prospect-theory sources to improve clarity for an ML audience.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which help clarify key aspects of the Pro-SF framework. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below and indicate planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Framework] Framework section: the manuscript introduces two additional scalar parameters (subjective reference points and probability distortion factors) to capture the three prospect-theory mechanisms but provides no identification argument or recovery procedure showing these parameters can be uniquely estimated from observed manipulation data rather than chosen by the modeler. Without such an argument the framework risks reducing to a flexible parametric extension whose gains may be driven by extra degrees of freedom.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The current manuscript does not include a formal identification argument or recovery procedure for the additional parameters. In the revised version we will add a subsection to the Framework section discussing parameter estimation. We will describe how subjective reference points and probability distortion factors can be recovered via maximum likelihood on observed manipulation trajectories or calibrated from behavioral economics literature, and we will report sensitivity analyses to show that performance improvements are robust rather than driven solely by extra degrees of freedom. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Framework] Equilibrium analysis: the claim that the modified best-response function still yields a well-defined Stackelberg equilibrium that the decision-maker can optimize against is stated at a high level but lacks a formal derivation or existence proof once the prospect-theory adjustments are inserted. This is load-bearing for the central modeling claim.

    Authors: We agree that a rigorous existence argument is needed. The manuscript currently asserts equilibrium existence at a high level without a detailed derivation. In the revision we will supply a formal proof, placed in an appendix, establishing that under standard assumptions of continuity of the prospect-theory value function and compactness of the feature space the modified best-response function continues to admit a Stackelberg equilibrium that the decision-maker can optimize against. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; framework extends external prospect theory

full rationale

The paper defines a new problem setting for behaviorally realistic strategic classification and proposes the Pro-SF framework by directly incorporating three established mechanisms from prospect theory (value-function asymmetry, reference-point shifts, and probability weighting) into the Stackelberg interaction. No equations or derivations in the abstract or described structure reduce the claimed results to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or self-citation chains by construction. The central modeling step treats prospect theory as an independent external input rather than deriving it from the paper's own outputs or assumptions. This is the most common honest non-finding for modeling papers that import behavioral concepts without internal closure.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on domain assumptions from prospect theory and the modeling choice to reformulate Stackelberg interactions with three specific bias mechanisms; no free parameters or invented entities are explicitly quantified in the abstract.

free parameters (2)
  • subjective reference points
    Different subjective reference points for agents as one of the three key mechanisms inspired by prospect theory
  • probability distortion factors
    Parameters controlling non-rational probability distortion in agent responses
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Existing strategic classification frameworks rely on the idealized assumption that agents are strictly rational
    This is stated as the limitation motivating the new problem setting
  • domain assumption Prospect theory mechanisms can be incorporated to capture behaviorally realistic strategic manipulations
    Basis for reformulating the Stackelberg-style interaction with the three mechanisms

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5785 in / 1483 out tokens · 58510 ms · 2026-05-20T05:23:56.468787+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 89 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    European Review , author=

    ‘Improving ratings’: audit in the British University system , volume=. European Review , author=. 1997 , pages=. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1234-981X(199707)5:3<305::AID-EURO184>3.0.CO;2-4 , number=

    work page doi:10.1002/(sici)1234-981x(199707)5:3 1997

  2. [2]

    Proceedings of the 2016 ACM conference on innovations in theoretical computer science , pages=

    Strategic classification , author=. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM conference on innovations in theoretical computer science , pages=

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency , pages=

    The double-edged sword of behavioral responses in strategic classification: Theory and user studies , author=. Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency , pages=

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.16355 , year=

    How strategic agents respond: Comparing analytical models with llm-generated responses in strategic classification , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.16355 , year=

    work page arXiv

  5. [5]

    , author=

    Algorithms for inverse reinforcement learning. , author=. Icml , volume=

    work page

  6. [6]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Differentiable convex optimization layers , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    work page

  7. [7]

    Cognitive psychology , volume=

    On the shape of the probability weighting function , author=. Cognitive psychology , volume=. 1999 , publisher=

    work page 1999

  8. [8]

    The review of financial studies , volume=

    Prospect theory and stock returns: An empirical test , author=. The review of financial studies , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    Annual review of political science , volume=

    Bounded rationality , author=. Annual review of political science , volume=. 1999 , publisher=

    work page 1999

  10. [10]

    2008 , publisher=

    Predictably irrational , author=. 2008 , publisher=

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    , author=

    Decision research: A field guide. , author=. 1990 , publisher=

    work page 1990

  12. [12]

    2021 , eprint=

    Strategic Classification in the Dark , author=. 2021 , eprint=

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    2024 National Conference on Communications (NCC) , pages=

    Optimal Stochastic Decision Rule for Strategic Classification , author=. 2024 National Conference on Communications (NCC) , pages=. 2024 , organization=

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Learning strategy-aware linear classifiers , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    work page

  15. [15]

    International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

    Causal strategic linear regression , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2020 , organization=

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    , booktitle =

    Harris, Keegan and Heidari, Hoda and Wu, Steven Z. , booktitle =. Stateful Strategic Regression , url =

    work page

  17. [17]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Who leads and who follows in strategic classification? , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    work page

  18. [18]

    Management Science , year=

    Optimal decision making under strategic behavior , author=. Management Science , year=

    work page

  19. [19]

    International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

    Performative prediction , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2020 , organization=

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    From predictions to decisions: Using lookahead regularization , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    work page

  21. [21]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Performative power , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    work page

  22. [22]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Anticipating performativity by predicting from predictions , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    work page

  23. [23]

    International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics , pages=

    Performative prediction with neural networks , author=. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics , pages=. 2023 , organization=

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Transactions on Machine Learning Research , issn=

    Learning to Incentivize Improvements from Strategic Agents , author=. Transactions on Machine Learning Research , issn=. 2023 , url=

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

    Strategic classification is causal modeling in disguise , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2020 , organization=

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

    Causal strategic classification: A tale of two shifts , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2023 , organization=

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    Causal Strategic Learning with Competitive Selection , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    work page

  28. [28]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Who’s gaming the system? a causally-motivated approach for detecting strategic adaptation , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    work page

  29. [29]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.01956 , year=

    Maximizing welfare with incentive-aware evaluation mechanisms , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.01956 , year=

    work page arXiv 2011

  30. [30]

    Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society , volume=

    Non-linear welfare-aware strategic learning , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society , volume=

    work page

  31. [31]

    Fairness Interventions as (

    Zhang, Xueru and Khalili, Mohammad Mahdi and Jin, Kun and Naghizadeh, Parinaz and Liu, Mingyan , booktitle =. Fairness Interventions as (. 2022 , editor =

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    2023 , isbn =

    Estornell, Andrew and Das, Sanmay and Liu, Yang and Vorobeychik, Yevgeniy , title =. 2023 , isbn =. doi:10.1145/3593013.3594006 , booktitle =

    work page doi:10.1145/3593013.3594006 2023

  33. [33]

    Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization , pages=

    Addressing strategic manipulation disparities in fair classification , author=. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization , pages=

    work page

  34. [34]

    McEvoy , title =

    David M. McEvoy , title =. Economics Bulletin , volume =. 2016 , note =

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency , pages=

    What does it mean to'solve'the problem of discrimination in hiring? Social, technical and legal perspectives from the UK on automated hiring systems , author=. Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency , pages=

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Dragan and Moritz Hardt , title =

    Smitha Milli and John Miller and Anca D. Dragan and Moritz Hardt , title =. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '19) , year =. doi:10.1145/3287560.3287576 , isbn =

    work page doi:10.1145/3287560.3287576

  37. [37]

    Financial Management , volume=

    The roles of alternative data and machine learning in fintech lending: evidence from the LendingClub consumer platform , author=. Financial Management , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    , author=

    MACHINE LEARNING IN EDUCATION-A SURVEY OF CURRENT RESEARCH TRENDS. , author=. Annals of DAAAM & Proceedings , volume=

    work page

  39. [39]

    Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part I , pages=

    Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk , author=. Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part I , pages=. 2013 , publisher=

    work page 2013

  40. [40]

    Journal of Risk and Uncertainty , volume=

    Third-generation prospect theory , author=. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty , volume=. 2008 , publisher=

    work page 2008

  41. [41]

    Political Studies Review , volume=

    Prospect theory and political decision making , author=. Political Studies Review , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    work page 2011

  42. [42]

    Journal of Management , volume=

    Management theory applications of prospect theory: Accomplishments, challenges, and opportunities , author=. Journal of Management , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    Prospect Theory and Asset Prices , urldate =

    Nicholas Barberis and Ming Huang and Tano Santos , journal =. Prospect Theory and Asset Prices , urldate =

    work page

  44. [44]

    Systems & Control Letters , volume=

    Prospect-theoretic Q-learning , author=. Systems & Control Letters , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    Neural computation , volume=

    Risk-sensitive reinforcement learning , author=. Neural computation , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    work page 2014

  46. [46]

    Prospect theory and political science , author=. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. , volume=. 2005 , publisher=

    work page 2005

  47. [47]

    Journal of Risk and uncertainty , volume=

    Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty , author=. Journal of Risk and uncertainty , volume=. 1992 , publisher=

    work page 1992

  48. [48]

    Theory and Decision , volume=

    Bounded rationality for relaxing best response and mutual consistency: the quantal hierarchy model of decision making , author=. Theory and Decision , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    The Quarterly Journal of Economics , volume=

    Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting , author=. The Quarterly Journal of Economics , volume=. 1997 , publisher=

    work page 1997

  50. [50]

    2000 , month = oct, doi =

    Behavioral Economics , author =. 2000 , month = oct, doi =

    work page 2000

  51. [51]

    SCMS Journal of Indian Management , volume=

    An empirical investigation into the influence of behavioral biases on investment behavior , author=. SCMS Journal of Indian Management , volume=

    work page

  52. [52]

    Todd, Peter M and Gigerenzer, Gerd , journal=. Pr. 2000 , publisher=

    work page 2000

  53. [53]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.08032 , year=

    Strategic classification with externalities , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.08032 , year=

    work page arXiv

  54. [54]

    Journal of Personalized Medicine , volume=

    Exploring rare disease patient attitudes and beliefs regarding genetic testing: implications for person-centered care , author=. Journal of Personalized Medicine , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    work page 2022

  55. [55]

    The Journal of Finance , volume=

    Prospect theory and stock market anomalies , author=. The Journal of Finance , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    work page 2021

  56. [56]

    International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

    Strategic instrumental variable regression: Recovering causal relationships from strategic responses , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2022 , organization=

    work page 2022

  57. [57]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.15765 , year=

    Strategic classification with graph neural networks , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.15765 , year=

    work page arXiv

  58. [58]

    International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

    Strategic classification made practical , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2021 , organization=

    work page 2021

  59. [59]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.00902 , year=

    An analysis of AI Decision under Risk: Prospect theory emerges in Large Language Models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.00902 , year=

    work page arXiv

  60. [60]

    American economic review , volume=

    Doing it now or later , author=. American economic review , volume=. 1999 , publisher=

    work page 1999

  61. [61]

    Econometrica , year =

    Prelec, Drazen , title =. Econometrica , year =

    work page

  62. [62]

    A novel version of the TODIM method based on the exponential model of prospect theory: The ExpTODIM method , journal =

    Alexandre Bevilacqua Leoneti and Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro Gomes , keywords =. A novel version of the TODIM method based on the exponential model of prospect theory: The ExpTODIM method , journal =. 2021 , issn =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.03.055 , url =

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2021.03.055 2021

  63. [63]

    Expert Syst

    Yeh, I-Cheng and Lien, Che-hui , title =. Expert Syst. Appl. , month =. 2009 , issue_date =. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2007.12.020 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2007.12.020 2009

  64. [64]

    IJCAI , year=

    Incentivizing recourse through auditing in strategic classification , author=. IJCAI , year=

    work page

  65. [65]

    1996 , howpublished =

    Becker, Barry and Kohavi, Ronny , title =. 1996 , howpublished =

    work page 1996

  66. [66]

    2015 , url =

    Alex Teboul , title =. 2015 , url =

    work page 2015

  67. [67]

    28th European modeling and simulation symposium, EMSS, Larnaca , pages=

    PaySim: A financial mobile money simulator for fraud detection , author=. 28th European modeling and simulation symposium, EMSS, Larnaca , pages=. 2016 , organization=

    work page 2016

  68. [68]

    ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation (TEAC) , volume=

    How do classifiers induce agents to invest effort strategically? , author=. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation (TEAC) , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    work page 2020

  69. [69]

    2021 , eprint=

    Optimal Recovery of Precision Matrix for Mahalanobis Distance from High Dimensional Noisy Observations in Manifold Learning , author=. 2021 , eprint=

    work page 2021

  70. [70]

    Abu Bakr and Oishe, Mahjabin Rahman , booktitle=

    Khan, Mohammad Mahmudur Rahman and Arif, Rezoana Bente and Siddique, Md. Abu Bakr and Oishe, Mahjabin Rahman , booktitle=. Study and Observation of the Variation of Accuracies of KNN, SVM, LMNN, ENN Algorithms on Eleven Different Datasets from UCI Machine Learning Repository , year=

    work page

  71. [71]

    1999 , howpublished =

    Hopkins and Mark and Reeber and Erik and Forman and George and Suermondt and Jaap , title =. 1999 , howpublished =

    work page 1999

  72. [72]

    1994 , howpublished =

    Hofmann, Hans , title =. 1994 , howpublished =

    work page 1994

  73. [73]

    2009 , howpublished =

    Yeh, I-Cheng , title =. 2009 , howpublished =

    work page 2009

  74. [74]

    , author=

    A REVIEW OF DYNAMIC STACKELBERG GAME MODELS. , author=. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems-Series B , volume=

    work page

  75. [75]

    Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics , year=

    Prospect theory, loss aversion, and political behavior , author=. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics , year=

    work page

  76. [76]

    Energy , volume=

    Risk assessment of renewable energy investments: A modified failure mode and effect analysis based on prospect theory and intuitionistic fuzzy AHP , author=. Energy , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    work page 2022

  77. [77]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Breaking the Gradient Barrier: Unveiling Large Language Models for Strategic Classification , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    work page

  78. [78]

    Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    Partial Fairness Awareness: Belief-Guided Strategic Mechanism for Strategic Agents , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    work page

  79. [79]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Environment inference for learning generalizable dynamical system , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    work page

  80. [80]

    IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , volume=

    Inductive meta-path learning for schema-complex heterogeneous information networks , author=. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    work page 2024

Showing first 80 references.