An official website of the United States government
Individuals often aim to reverse undesired outcomes in interactions with automated systems, like loan denials, by either implementing system-recommended actions (recourse), or manipulating their features. While providing recourse benefits users and enhances system utility, it also provides information about the decision process that can be used for more effective strategic manipulation, especially when the individuals collectively share such information with each other. We show that this tension leads rational utility-maximizing systems to frequently withhold recourse, resulting in decreased population utility, particularly impacting sensitive groups. To mitigate these effects, we explore the role of recourse subsidies, finding them effective in increasing the provision of recourse actions by rational systems, as well as lowering the potential social cost and mitigating unfairness caused by recourse withholding.
more »
« less
Providing Fair Recourse over Plausible Groups
Machine learning models now automate decisions in applications where we may wish to provide recourse to adversely affected individuals. In practice, existing methods to provide recourse return actions that fail to account for latent characteristics that are not captured in the model (e.g., age, sex, marital status). In this paper, we study how the cost and feasibility of recourse can change across these latent groups. We introduce a notion of group-level plausibility to identify groups of individuals with a shared set of latent characteristics. We develop a general-purpose clustering procedure to identify groups from samples. Further, we propose a constrained optimization approach to learn models that equalize the cost of recourse over latent groups. We evaluate our approach through an empirical study on simulated and real-world datasets, showing that it can produce models that have better performance in terms of overall costs and feasibility at a group level.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10530496
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- Volume:
- 38
- Issue:
- 19
- ISSN:
- 2159-5399
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 21753 to 21760
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Counterfactual explanations are emerging as an attractive option for providing recourse to individuals adversely impacted by algorithmic decisions. As they are deployed in critical applications (e.g. law enforcement, financial lending), it becomes important to ensure that we clearly understand the vulnerabilties of these methods and find ways to address them. However, there is little understanding of the vulnerabilities and shortcomings of counterfactual explanations. In this work, we introduce the first framework that describes the vulnerabilities of counterfactual explanations and shows how they can be manipulated. More specifically, we show counterfactual explanations may converge to drastically different counterfactuals under a small perturbation indicating they are not robust. Leveraging this insight, we introduce a novel objective to train seemingly fair models where counterfactual explanations find much lower cost recourse under a slight perturbation. We describe how these models can unfairly provide low-cost recourse for specific subgroups in the data while appearing fair to auditors. We perform experiments on loan and violent crime prediction data sets where certain subgroups achieve up to 20x lower cost recourse under the perturbation. These results raise concerns regarding the dependability of current counterfactual explanation techniques, which we hope will inspire investigations in robust counterfactual explanations.more » « less
-
Counterfactual explanations are emerging as an attractive option for providing recourse to individuals adversely impacted by algorithmic decisions. As they are deployed in critical applications (e.g. law enforcement, financial lending), it becomes important to ensure that we clearly understand the vulnerabilities of these methods and find ways to address them. However, there is little understanding of the vulnerabilities and shortcomings of counterfactual explanations. In this work, we introduce the first framework that describes the vulnerabilities of counterfactual explanations and shows how they can be manipulated. More specifically, we show counterfactual explanations may converge to drastically different counterfactuals under a small perturbation indicating they are not robust. Leveraging this insight, we introduce a novel objective to train seemingly fair models where counterfactual explanations find much lower cost recourse under a slight perturbation. We describe how these models can unfairly provide low-cost recourse for specific subgroups in the data while appearing fair to auditors. We perform experiments on loan and violent crime prediction data sets where certain subgroups achieve up to 20x lower cost recourse under the perturbation. These results raise concerns regarding the dependability of current counterfactual explanation techniques, which we hope will inspire investigations in robust counterfactual explanations.more » « less
-
Cybersickness – discomfort caused by virtual reality (VR) – remains a significant problem that negatively affects the user experience. Research on individual differences in cybersickness has typically focused on overall sickness intensity, but a detailed understanding should include whether individuals differ in the relative intensity of cybersickness symptoms. This study used latent profile analysis (LPA) to explore whether there exist groups of individuals who experience common patterns of cybersickness symptoms. Participants played a VR game for up to 20 min. LPA indicated three groups with low, medium, and high overall cybersickness. Further, there were similarities and differences in relative patterns of nausea, disorientation, and oculomotor symptoms between groups. Disorientation was lower than nausea and oculomotor symptoms for all three groups. Nausea and oculomotor were experienced at similar levels within the high and low sickness groups, but the medium sickness group experienced more nausea than oculomotor. Characteristics of group members varied across groups, including gender, virtual reality experience, video game experience, and history of motion sickness. These findings identify distinct individual experiences in symptomology that go beyond overall sickness intensity, which could enable future interventions that target certain groups of individuals and specific symptoms.more » « less
-
Algorithmic systems are often called upon to assist in high-stakes decision making. In light of this, algorithmic recourse, the principle wherein individuals should be able to take action against an undesirable outcome made by an algorithmic system, is receiving growing attention. The bulk of the literature on algorithmic recourse to-date focuses primarily on how to provide recourse to a single individual, overlooking a critical element: the effects of a continuously changing context. Disregarding these effects on recourse is a significant oversight, since, in almost all cases, recourse consists of an individual making a first, unfavorable attempt, and then being given an opportunity to make one or several attempts at a later date — when the context might have changed. This can create false expectations, as initial recourse recommendations may become less reliable over time due to model drift and competition for access to the favorable outcome between individuals. In this work we propose an agent-based simulation framework for studying the effects of a continuously changing environment on algorithmic recourse. In particular, we identify two main effects that can alter the reliability of recourse for individuals represented by the agents: (1) competition with other agents acting upon recourse, and (2) competition with new agents entering the environment. Our findings highlight that only a small set of specific parameterizations result in algorithmic recourse that is reliable for agents over time. Consequently, we argue that substantial additional work is needed to understand recourse reliability over time, and to develop recourse methods that reward agents’ effort.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v38i19.30175
