mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Fair Secretaries with Unfair Predictions

arXiv 2411.09854 ↗First posted 15 Nov 2024cs.LG cs.DScited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Algorithms with predictions is a recent framework for decision-making under uncertainty that leverages the power of machine-learned predictions without making any assumption about their quality. The goal in this framework is for algorithms to achieve an improved performance when the predictions are accurate while maintaining acceptable guarantees when the predictions are erroneous. A serious concern with algorithms that use predictions is that these predictions can be biased and, as a result, cause the algorithm to make decisions that are deemed unfair. We show that this concern manifests itself in the classical secretary problem in the learning-augmented setting -- the state-of-the-art algorithm can have zero probability of accepting the best candidate, which we deem unfair, despite promising to accept a candidate whose expected value is at least maxOmega (1) , 1 - O(ε) times the optimal value, where ε is the prediction error. We show how to preserve this promise while also guaranteeing to accept the best candidate with probability Omega(1). Our algorithm and analysis are based on a new "pegging" idea that diverges from existing works and simplifies/unifies some of their results. Finally, we extend to the k-secretary problem and complement our theoretical analysis with experiments.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Nov 2024.

Builds on

24 of 56 references.

References · 24

  1. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  2. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 672
  3. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 586
  4. 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 403
  5. 2018Competitive caching with machine learned advicecited by 195
  6. 2016Fairness in Learning: Classic and Contextual Banditscited by 168
  7. 2020Algorithms with Predictionscited by 153
  8. 2016Measuring Fairness in Ranked Outputscited by 81
  9. 2017Ranking with Fairness Constraintscited by 78
  10. 2020Online metric algorithms with untrusted predictionscited by 75
  11. 2020Secretary and Online Matching Problems with Machine Learned Advicecited by 71
  12. 2020Secretaries with Advicecited by 41
12 more
  1. 2020Regularized Online Allocation Problems: Fairness and Beyondcited by 22
  2. 2021Fair Dynamic Rationingcited by 19
  3. 2019Efficient candidate screening under multiple tests and implications for fairnesscited by 16
  4. 2020Group-level Fairness Maximization in Online Bipartite Matchingcited by 14
  5. 2019Competitive Analysis with a Sample and the Secretary Problemcited by 9
  6. 2015Prophet Secretarycited by 6
  7. 2022Individual Fairness in Prophet Inequalitiescited by 6
  8. 2017Prophet Secretary: Surpassing the 1-1/e Barriercited by 4
  9. 2023The Secretary Problem with Predictionscited by 4
  10. 2018Prophet Secretary Through Blind Strategiescited by 3
  11. 2020The Secretary Problem with Independent Samplingcited by 3
  12. 2024A short note about the learning-augmented secretary problemcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

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

4 papers.