arXiv preprint ·
Strategic Classification Has a Missing Lever: Audit Risk
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Strategic classification studies how a decision maker should choose a classifier when the agents being classified can adjust their features in response to it. In existing models, the classifier is the only instrument available to the decision maker, and therefore a feature that is predictive but easy to fake can only be down-weighted or discarded. However, in many settings the decision maker can also verify: lenders verify income, admissions offices check documents, and tax authorities audit returns. In this paper, we propose a model of strategic classification in which the firm jointly designs a linear classifier and an \emph{audit profile}, which assigns to each fakeable feature a probability of detection and a penalty when caught. We show that under linear costs, the classifier affects the audit problem only through the distribution of gaming rents it induces, so that the joint design problem decomposes into the choice of a score rule and an audit allocation problem. We use this decomposition to characterize the optimal audit allocation, to identify when the allocation problem is tractable and when it is NP-hard (namely, when agents can game through overlapping features under an inspection cap), and to bound the regret of a firm that has to learn the rents by auditing. We further show that audit intensity is a quantity to be tuned rather than maximized: welfare is single-peaked in it, and a firm and a social planner disagree on the mix of detection and penalty that delivers a given level of deterrence. Notably, two populations with identical costs and causal structure can game in one domain and improve in the other, a difference that a cost-only model cannot account for. Together, our findings highlight that whether a feature is ``gameable'' depends on the institution's verification policy as much as on the feature itself.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computer Science & Game Theory
Cross-Platform vs Native Mobile Development: An Empirical Study of Software Quality Trade-offs
Algorithmic Collusion and the Complexity of Information-Value-Free Equilibria
Fair Prophets
A Horizon-Independent Regret Bound for Optimistic Hedge in General-Sum Games
Guiding Agents of Quantum Games to Equilibrium using Matrix Exponential Fixed-Point Iteration
Get the few papers worth your time in Computer Science & Game Theory every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.