mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Improved Bayes Risk Can Yield Reduced Social Welfare Under Competition

arXiv 2306.14670 ↗First posted 26 Jun 2023cs.GT cs.CY cs.LGcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As the scale of machine learning models increases, trends such as scaling laws anticipate consistent downstream improvements in predictive accuracy. However, these trends take the perspective of a single model-provider in isolation, while in reality providers often compete with each other for users. In this work, we demonstrate that competition can fundamentally alter the behavior of these scaling trends, even causing overall predictive accuracy across users to be non-monotonic or decreasing with scale. We define a model of competition for classification tasks, and use data representations as a lens for studying the impact of increases in scale. We find many settings where improving data representation quality (as measured by Bayes risk) decreases the overall predictive accuracy across users (i.e., social welfare) for a marketplace of competing model-providers. Our examples range from closed-form formulas in simple settings to simulations with pretrained representations on CIFAR-10. At a conceptual level, our work suggests that favorable scaling trends for individual model-providers need not translate to downstream improvements in social welfare in marketplaces with multiple model providers.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jun 2023.

Builds on

21 of 45 references.

References · 21

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
  3. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
  4. 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 2,927
  5. 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 363
  6. 2021Explaining Neural Scaling Lawscited by 353
  7. 2021Scaling Laws for Transfercited by 265
  8. 2015Strategic Classificationcited by 256
  9. 2018Delayed Impact of Fair Machine Learningcited by 183
  10. 2021Algorithmic Monoculture and Social Welfarecited by 98
  11. 2022Picking on the Same Person: Does Algorithmic Monoculture lead to Outcome Homogenization?cited by 89
  12. 2020A Neural Scaling Law from the Dimension of the Data Manifoldcited by 48
9 more
  1. 2019The Disparate Equilibria of Algorithmic Decision Making when Individuals Invest Rationallycited by 41
  2. 2022Estimating and Penalizing Induced Preference Shifts in Recommender Systemscited by 29
  3. 2022Preference Dynamics Under Personalized Recommendationscited by 25
  4. 2022Competition, Alignment, and Equilibria in Digital Marketplacescited by 17
  5. 2019Regression Equilibriumcited by 16
  6. 2020Competing Bandits: The Perils of Exploration Under Competitioncited by 12
  7. 2019Bias-Variance Gamescited by 9
  8. 2022Towards Psychologically-Grounded Dynamic Preference Modelscited by 8
  9. 2022Competition over data: how does data purchase affect users?cited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 7; 2026: 2.

14 papers.

Sort: