mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Learnability Gaps of Strategic Classification

arXiv 2402.19303 ↗First posted 29 Feb 2024cs.LG cs.GTcited by 16

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In contrast with standard classification tasks, strategic classification involves agents strategically modifying their features in an effort to receive favorable predictions. For instance, given a classifier determining loan approval based on credit scores, applicants may open or close their credit cards to fool the classifier. The learning goal is to find a classifier robust against strategic manipulations. Various settings, based on what and when information is known, have been explored in strategic classification. In this work, we focus on addressing a fundamental question: the learnability gaps between strategic classification and standard learning. We essentially show that any learnable class is also strategically learnable: we first consider a fully informative setting, where the manipulation structure (which is modeled by a manipulation graph G^star) is known and during training time the learner has access to both the pre-manipulation data and post-manipulation data. We provide nearly tight sample complexity and regret bounds, offering significant improvements over prior results. Then, we relax the fully informative setting by introducing two natural types of uncertainty. First, following Ahmadi et al. (2023), we consider the setting in which the learner only has access to the post-manipulation data. We improve the results of Ahmadi et al. (2023) and close the gap between mistake upper bound and lower bound raised by them. Our second relaxation of the fully informative setting introduces uncertainty to the manipulation structure. That is, we assume that the manipulation graph is unknown but belongs to a known class of graphs. We provide nearly tight bounds on the learning complexity in various unknown manipulation graph settings. Notably, our algorithm in this setting is of independent interest and can be applied to other problems such as multi-label learning.

Key facts. Cited by 16 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Feb 2024.

Builds on

24 of 38 references.

References · 24

  1. 2015Strategic Classificationcited by 256
  2. 2017Strategic Classification from Revealed Preferencescited by 126
  3. 2018The Social Cost of Strategic Classificationcited by 105
  4. 2019Strategic Classification is Causal Modeling in Disguisecited by 92
  5. 2019VC Classes are Adversarially Robustly Learnable, but Only Improperlycited by 83
  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. 2020PAC-Learning for Strategic Classificationcited by 50
  10. 2020The Strategic Perceptroncited by 48
  11. 2021Information Discrepancy in Strategic Learningcited by 48
  12. 2021Alternative Microfoundations for Strategic Classificationcited by 47
12 more
  1. 2020Maximizing Welfare with Incentive-Aware Evaluation Mechanismscited by 46
  2. 2019The Disparate Equilibria of Algorithmic Decision Making when Individuals Invest Rationallycited by 41
  3. 2020The Role of Randomness and Noise in Strategic Classificationcited by 40
  4. 2021Stateful Strategic Regressioncited by 32
  5. 2022Learning in Stackelberg Games with Non-myopic Agentscited by 29
  6. 2022On classification of strategic agents who can both game and improvecited by 27
  7. 2023Strategic Classification under Unknown Personalized Manipulationcited by 23
  8. 2022Learning Losses for Strategic Classificationcited by 22
  9. 2019Optimal Decision Making Under Strategic Behaviorcited by 20
  10. 2023Optimal Prediction Using Expert Advice and Randomized Littlestone Dimensioncited by 18
  11. 2023Fundamental Bounds on Online Strategic Classificationcited by 17
  12. 2023Sequential Strategic Screeningcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

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

16 papers.

Sort: