Generalization Error Bounds for Learning under Censored Feedback
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Generalization error bounds from learning theory provide statistical guarantees on how well an algorithm will perform on previously unseen data. In this paper, we characterize the impacts of data non-IIDness due to censored feedback (a.k.a. selective labeling bias) on such bounds. Censored feedback is ubiquitous in many real-world online selection and classification tasks (e.g., hiring, lending, recommendation systems) where the true label of a data point is only revealed if a favorable decision is made (e.g., accepting a candidate, approving a loan, displaying an ad), and remains unknown otherwise. We first derive an extension of the well-known Dvoretzky-Kiefer-Wolfowitz (DKW) inequality, which characterizes the gap between empirical and theoretical data distribution CDFs learned from IID data, to problems with non-IID data due to censored feedback. We then use this CDF error bound to provide a bound on the generalization error guarantees of a classifier trained on such non-IID data. We show that existing generalization error bounds (which do not account for censored feedback) fail to correctly capture the model's generalization guarantees, verifying the need for our bounds. We further analyze the effectiveness of (pure and bounded) exploration techniques, proposed by recent literature as a way to alleviate censored feedback, on improving our error bounds. Together, our findings illustrate how a decision maker should account for the trade-off between strengthening the generalization guarantees of an algorithm and the costs incurred in data collection when future data availability is limited by censored feedback.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Apr 2024.
Builds on
17 of 60 references.
References · 17
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 443
- 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 402
- 2017Runaway Feedback Loops in Predictive Policingcited by 97
- 2017Accurate Inference for Adaptive Linear Modelscited by 39
- 2017Why Adaptively Collected Data Have Negative Bias and How to Correct for Itcited by 36
- 2019Equal Opportunity in Online Classification with Partial Feedbackcited by 34
- 2021Unintended Selection: Persistent Qualification Rate Disparities and Interventionscited by 18
- 2021Pricing Query Complexity of Revenue Maximizationcited by 12
- 2020Adaptive Region-Based Active Learningcited by 10
- 2021Partitioned Active Learning for Heterogeneous Systemscited by 10
- 2020Active Learning for Skewed Data Setscited by 6
5 more
- 2021Adaptive Data Debiasing through Bounded Explorationcited by 5
- 2023Algorithmic Censoring in Dynamic Learning Systemscited by 5
- 2023Learning Thresholds with Latent Values and Censored Feedbackcited by 3
- 2019A Generalization Theory based on Independent and Task-Identically Distributed Assumptioncited by 1
- 2022Gray Learning from Non-IID Data with Out-of-distribution Samplescited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.