Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2410.02513

Minimax Group Fairness in Strategic Classification

Emily Diana·Saeed Sharifi-Malvajerdi·Ali Vakilian
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In strategic classification, agents manipulate their features, at a cost, to receive a positive classification outcome from the learner's classifier. The goal of the learner in such settings is to learn a classifier that is robust to strategic manipulations. While the majority of works in this domain consider accuracy as the primary objective of the learner, in this work, we consider learning objectives that have group fairness guarantees in addition to accuracy guarantees. We work with the minimax group fairness notion that asks for minimizing the maximal group error rate across population groups. We formalize a fairness-aware Stackelberg game between a population of agents consisting of several groups, with each group having its own cost function, and a learner in the agnostic PAC setting in which the learner is working with a hypothesis class H. When the cost functions of the agents are separable, we show the existence of an efficient algorithm that finds an approximately optimal deterministic classifier for the learner when the number of groups is small. This algorithm remains efficient, both statistically and computationally, even when H is the set of all classifiers. We then consider cost functions that are not necessarily separable and show the existence of oracle-efficient algorithms that find approximately optimal randomized classifiers for the learner when H has finite strategic VC dimension. These algorithms work under the assumption that the learner is fully transparent: the learner draws a classifier from its distribution (randomized classifier) before the agents respond by manipulating their feature vectors. We highlight the effectiveness of such transparency in developing oracle-efficient algorithms. We conclude with verifying the efficacy of our algorithms on real data by conducting an experimental analysis.

Explore related subjects

cs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Emily Diana, Saeed Sharifi-Malvajerdi, Ali Vakilian. 2024-10-03. Minimax Group Fairness in Strategic Classification. https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.02513

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗