REVIEW 2 cited by
Strategic Classification
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Machine learning relies on the assumption that unseen test instances of a classification problem follow the same distribution as observed training data. However, this principle can break down when machine learning is used to make important decisions about the welfare (employment, education, health) of strategic individuals. Knowing information about the classifier, such individuals may manipulate their attributes in order to obtain a better classification outcome. As a result of this behavior---often referred to as gaming---the performance of the classifier may deteriorate sharply. Indeed, gaming is a well-known obstacle for using machine learning methods in practice; in financial policy-making, the problem is widely known as Goodhart's law. In this paper, we formalize the problem, and pursue algorithms for learning classifiers that are robust to gaming. We model classification as a sequential game between a player named "Jury" and a player named "Contestant." Jury designs a classifier, and Contestant receives an input to the classifier, which he may change at some cost. Jury's goal is to achieve high classification accuracy with respect to Contestant's original input and some underlying target classification function. Contestant's goal is to achieve a favorable classification outcome while taking into account the cost of achieving it. For a natural class of cost functions, we obtain computationally efficient learning algorithms which are near-optimal. Surprisingly, our algorithms are efficient even on concept classes that are computationally hard to learn. For general cost functions, designing an approximately optimal strategy-proof classifier, for inverse-polynomial approximation, is NP-hard.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Desirable Effort Fairness and Optimality Trade-offs in Strategic Learning
Constraining a strategic classifier to keep desirable-effort incentives fair between two groups costs the principal an explicit accuracy or welfare loss bounded by the fairness tolerance beta.
-
When Is Delegated Play Truthful? Within-Range Regret and the Trilemma of Aligned Delegation
The gain from misreporting to your own proxy equals the proxy's within-range regret, so honest reporting is optimal exactly when the proxy already plays the best reachable action; guardrails then face a binding–truthf...
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.