mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Bayesian Strategic Classification

arXiv 2402.08758 ↗First posted 13 Feb 2024cs.LG cs.GTcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In strategic classification, agents modify their features, at a cost, to ideally obtain a positive classification from the learner's classifier. The typical response of the learner is to carefully modify their classifier to be robust to such strategic behavior. When reasoning about agent manipulations, most papers that study strategic classification rely on the following strong assumption: agents fully know the exact parameters of the deployed classifier by the learner. This often is an unrealistic assumption when using complex or proprietary machine learning techniques in real-world prediction tasks. We initiate the study of partial information release by the learner in strategic classification. We move away from the traditional assumption that agents have full knowledge of the classifier. Instead, we consider agents that have a common distributional prior on which classifier the learner is using. The learner in our model can reveal truthful, yet not necessarily complete, information about the deployed classifier to the agents. The learner's goal is to release just enough information about the classifier to maximize accuracy. We show how such partial information release can, counter-intuitively, benefit the learner's accuracy, despite increasing agents' abilities to manipulate. We show that while it is intractable to compute the best response of an agent in the general case, there exist oracle-efficient algorithms that can solve the best response of the agents when the learner's hypothesis class is the class of linear classifiers, or when the agents' cost function satisfies a natural notion of submodularity as we define. We then turn our attention to the learner's optimization problem and provide both positive and negative results on the algorithmic problem of how much information the learner should release about the classifier to maximize their expected accuracy.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Feb 2024.

Builds on

23 of 42 references.

References · 23

  1. 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 328
  2. 2020Performative Predictioncited by 327
  3. 2015Strategic Classificationcited by 257
  4. 2018The Social Cost of Strategic Classificationcited by 105
  5. 2019Strategic Classification is Causal Modeling in Disguisecited by 92
  6. 2018The Disparate Effects of Strategic Manipulationcited by 75
  7. 2021Strategic Classification in the Darkcited by 66
  8. 2020Causal Strategic Linear Regressioncited by 65
  9. 2020The Strategic Perceptroncited by 48
  10. 2021Information Discrepancy in Strategic Learningcited by 48
  11. 2021Alternative Microfoundations for Strategic Classificationcited by 47
  12. 2020Maximizing Welfare with Incentive-Aware Evaluation Mechanismscited by 46
11 more
  1. 2019The Disparate Equilibria of Algorithmic Decision Making when Individuals Invest Rationallycited by 41
  2. 2020The Role of Randomness and Noise in Strategic Classificationcited by 40
  3. 2021Stateful Strategic Regressioncited by 32
  4. 2023Calibrated Stackelberg Games: Learning Optimal Commitments Against Calibrated Agentscited by 25
  5. 2018Strategyproof Linear Regression in High Dimensionscited by 22
  6. 2019Optimal Decision Making Under Strategic Behaviorcited by 20
  7. 2020Manipulation-Proof Machine Learningcited by 20
  8. 2021Bayesian Persuasion for Algorithmic Recoursecited by 14
  9. 2015Truthful Linear Regressioncited by 13
  10. 2019Optimal approximation for unconstrained non-submodular minimizationcited by 11
  11. 2023Screening with Disadvantaged Agentscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 5; 2026: 7.

13 papers.

Sort: