mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Algorithmic Decision-Making under Agents with Persistent Improvement

arXiv 2405.01807 ↗First posted 3 May 2024cs.GT cs.AIcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper studies algorithmic decision-making under human's strategic behavior, where a decision maker uses an algorithm to make decisions about human agents, and the latter with information about the algorithm may exert effort strategically and improve to receive favorable decisions. Unlike prior works that assume agents benefit from their efforts immediately, we consider realistic scenarios where the impacts of these efforts are persistent and agents benefit from efforts by making improvements gradually. We first develop a dynamic model to characterize persistent improvements and based on this construct a Stackelberg game to model the interplay between agents and the decision-maker. We analytically characterize the equilibrium strategies and identify conditions under which agents have incentives to improve. With the dynamics, we then study how the decision-maker can design an optimal policy to incentivize the largest improvements inside the agent population. We also extend the model to settings where 1) agents may be dishonest and game the algorithm into making favorable but erroneous decisions; 2) honest efforts are forgettable and not sufficient to guarantee persistent improvements. With the extended models, we further examine conditions under which agents prefer honest efforts over dishonest behavior and the impacts of forgettable efforts.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 May 2024.

Builds on

33 of 63 references.

References · 33

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 363
  3. 2020Performative Predictioncited by 318
  4. 2015Strategic Classificationcited by 256
  5. 2018Delayed Impact of Fair Machine Learningcited by 183
  6. 2017Strategic Classification from Revealed Preferencescited by 126
  7. 2019Strategic Classification is Causal Modeling in Disguisecited by 92
  8. 2018How Do Classifiers Induce Agents To Invest Effort Strategically?cited by 82
  9. 2021How to Learn when Data Reacts to Your Model: Performative Gradient Descentcited by 70
  10. 2020Causal Strategic Linear Regressioncited by 65
  11. 2020How Do Fair Decisions Fare in Long-term Qualification?cited by 59
  12. 2020PAC-Learning for Strategic Classificationcited by 50
21 more
  1. 2020The Strategic Perceptroncited by 48
  2. 2021Information Discrepancy in Strategic Learningcited by 48
  3. 2021Alternative Microfoundations for Strategic Classificationcited by 47
  4. 2022Performative Powercited by 42
  5. 2020The Role of Randomness and Noise in Strategic Classificationcited by 40
  6. 2019Group Retention when Using Machine Learning in Sequential Decision Making: the Interplay between User Dynamics and Fairnesscited by 38
  7. 2020Fairness in Learning-Based Sequential Decision Algorithms: A Surveycited by 35
  8. 2021Stateful Strategic Regressioncited by 32
  9. 2023Causal Strategic Classification: A Tale of Two Shiftscited by 30
  10. 2022On classification of strategic agents who can both game and improvecited by 27
  11. 2022Preference Dynamics Under Personalized Recommendationscited by 25
  12. 2023Long-Term Fairness with Unknown Dynamicscited by 25
  13. 2023Strategic Classification under Unknown Personalized Manipulationcited by 23
  14. 2021Strategic Rankingcited by 21
  15. 2020From Predictions to Decisions: Using Lookahead Regularizationcited by 19
  16. 2021Unintended Selection: Persistent Qualification Rate Disparities and Interventionscited by 18
  17. 2021Polarization in Geometric Opinion Dynamicscited by 16
  18. 2023Performative Federated Learning: A Solution to Model-Dependent and Heterogeneous Distribution Shiftscited by 14
  19. 2022Setting Fair Incentives to Maximize Improvementcited by 7
  20. 2022Emergent specialization from participation dynamics and multi-learner retrainingcited by 5
  21. 2019Strategic Inference with a Single Private Samplecited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 4; 2026: 1.

7 papers.