Yatong Chen

Zeyu Tang, Yatong Chen, Yang Liu et al. · stanford

The pursuit of long-term fairness involves the interplay between decision-making and the underlying data generating process. In this paper, through causal modeling with a directed acyclic graph (DAG) on the decision-distribution interplay, we investigate the possibility of achieving long-term fairness from a dynamic perspective. We propose Tier Balancing, a technically more challenging but more natural notion to achieve in the context of long-term, dynamic fairness analysis. Different from previous fairness notions that are defined purely on observed variables, our notion goes one step further, capturing behind-the-scenes situation changes on the unobserved latent causal factors that directly carry out the influence from the current decision to the future data distribution. Under the specified dynamics, we prove that in general one cannot achieve the long-term fairness goal only through one-step interventions. Furthermore, in the effort of approaching long-term fairness, we consider the mission of "getting closer to" the long-term fairness goal and present possibility and impossibility results accordingly.

Yatong Chen, Reilly Raab, Jialu Wang et al.

Given an algorithmic predictor that is "fair" on some source distribution, will it still be fair on an unknown target distribution that differs from the source within some bound? In this paper, we study the transferability of statistical group fairness for machine learning predictors (i.e., classifiers or regressors) subject to bounded distribution shifts. Such shifts may be introduced by initial training data uncertainties, user adaptation to a deployed predictor, dynamic environments, or the use of pre-trained models in new settings. Herein, we develop a bound that characterizes such transferability, flagging potentially inappropriate deployments of machine learning for socially consequential tasks. We first develop a framework for bounding violations of statistical fairness subject to distribution shift, formulating a generic upper bound for transferred fairness violations as our primary result. We then develop bounds for specific worked examples, focusing on two commonly used fairness definitions (i.e., demographic parity and equalized odds) and two classes of distribution shift (i.e., covariate shift and label shift). Finally, we compare our theoretical bounds to deterministic models of distribution shift and against real-world data, finding that we are able to estimate fairness violation bounds in practice, even when simplifying assumptions are only approximately satisfied.

Jimmy Wu, Yatong Chen, Yang Liu

We study the problem of classifier derandomization in machine learning: given a stochastic binary classifier $f: X \to [0,1]$, sample a deterministic classifier $\hat{f}: X \to \{0,1\}$ that approximates the output of $f$ in aggregate over any data distribution. Recent work revealed how to efficiently derandomize a stochastic classifier with strong output approximation guarantees, but at the cost of individual fairness -- that is, if $f$ treated similar inputs similarly, $\hat{f}$ did not. In this paper, we initiate a systematic study of classifier derandomization with metric fairness guarantees. We show that the prior derandomization approach is almost maximally metric-unfair, and that a simple ``random threshold'' derandomization achieves optimal fairness preservation but with weaker output approximation. We then devise a derandomization procedure that provides an appealing tradeoff between these two: if $f$ is $α$-metric fair according to a metric $d$ with a locality-sensitive hash (LSH) family, then our derandomized $\hat{f}$ is, with high probability, $O(α)$-metric fair and a close approximation of $f$. We also prove generic results applicable to all (fair and unfair) classifier derandomization procedures, including a bias-variance decomposition and reductions between various notions of metric fairness.

Tomoyoshi Kimura, Xinlin Li, Osama Hanna et al.

Standard multimodal self-supervised learning (SSL) algorithms regard cross-modal synchronization as implicit supervisory labels during pretraining, thus posing high requirements on the scale and quality of multimodal samples. These constraints significantly limit the performance of sensing intelligence in IoT applications, as the heterogeneity and the non-interpretability of time-series signals result in abundant unimodal data but scarce high-quality multimodal pairs. This paper proposes InfoMAE, a cross-modal alignment framework that tackles the challenge of multimodal pair efficiency under the SSL setting by facilitating efficient cross-modal alignment of pretrained unimodal representations. InfoMAE achieves \textit{efficient cross-modal alignment} with \textit{limited data pairs} through a novel information theory-inspired formulation that simultaneously addresses distribution-level and instance-level alignment. Extensive experiments on two real-world IoT applications are performed to evaluate InfoMAE's pairing efficiency to bridge pretrained unimodal models into a cohesive joint multimodal model. InfoMAE enhances downstream multimodal tasks by over 60% with significantly improved multimodal pairing efficiency. It also improves unimodal task accuracy by an average of 22%.

Florian E. Dorner, Yatong Chen, André F. Cruz et al.

Test-time scaling aims to improve language model performance by leveraging additional compute during inference. Many works have empirically studied techniques such as Best-of-N (BoN) and Rejection Sampling (RS) that make use of a verifier to enable test-time scaling. However, to date there is little theoretical understanding of how verifier imperfection affects performance -- a gap we address in this work. Specifically, we prove that the instance-level accuracy of these methods is precisely characterized by the geometry of the verifier's ROC curve. Our theory has two important takeaways, confirmed by experiments with Qwen and LLama models on GSM8K and MATH500. First, RS outperforms BoN for fixed compute, while both methods converge to the same accuracy in the infinite-compute limit. Second, it is generally impossible to predict the high-compute performance of either method based on observations in the low-compute regime.

Safwan Hossain, Yatong Chen, Yiling Chen

We examine hypothesis testing within a principal-agent framework, where a strategic agent, holding private beliefs about the effectiveness of a product, submits data to a principal who decides on approval. The principal employs a hypothesis testing rule, aiming to pick a p-value threshold that balances false positives and false negatives while anticipating the agent's incentive to maximize expected profitability. Building on prior work, we develop a game-theoretic model that captures how the agent's participation and reporting behavior respond to the principal's statistical decision rule. Despite the complexity of the interaction, we show that the principal's errors exhibit clear monotonic behavior when segmented by an efficiently computable critical p-value threshold, leading to an interpretable characterization of their optimal p-value threshold. We empirically validate our model and these insights using publicly available data on drug approvals. Overall, our work offers a comprehensive perspective on strategic interactions within the hypothesis testing framework, providing technical and regulatory insights.

Yatong Chen, Andrew Estornell, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik et al.

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.

Yatong Chen, Wei Tang, Chien-Ju Ho et al.

Performative prediction, as introduced by Perdomo et al, is a framework for studying social prediction in which the data distribution itself changes in response to the deployment of a model. Existing work in this field usually hinges on three assumptions that are easily violated in practice: that the performative risk is convex over the deployed model, that the mapping from the model to the data distribution is known to the model designer in advance, and the first-order information of the performative risk is available. In this paper, we initiate the study of performative prediction problems that do not require these assumptions. Specifically, we develop a reparameterization framework that reparametrizes the performative prediction objective as a function of the induced data distribution. We then develop a two-level zeroth-order optimization procedure, where the first level performs iterative optimization on the distribution parameter space, and the second level learns the model that induces a particular target distribution at each iteration. Under mild conditions, this reparameterization allows us to transform the non-convex objective into a convex one and achieve provable regret guarantees. In particular, we provide a regret bound that is sublinear in the total number of performative samples taken and is only polynomial in the dimension of the model parameter.

Yatong Chen, Zeyu Tang, Kun Zhang et al.

Given an algorithmic predictor that is accurate on some source population consisting of strategic human decision subjects, will it remain accurate if the population respond to it? In our setting, an agent or a user corresponds to a sample $(X,Y)$ drawn from a distribution $\cal{D}$ and will face a model $h$ and its classification result $h(X)$. Agents can modify $X$ to adapt to $h$, which will incur a distribution shift on $(X,Y)$. Our formulation is motivated by applications where the deployed machine learning models are subjected to human agents, and will ultimately face responsive and interactive data distributions. We formalize the discussions of the transferability of a model by studying how the performance of the model trained on the available source distribution (data) would translate to the performance on its induced domain. We provide both upper bounds for the performance gap due to the induced domain shift, as well as lower bounds for the trade-offs that a classifier has to suffer on either the source training distribution or the induced target distribution. We provide further instantiated analysis for two popular domain adaptation settings, including covariate shift and target shift.

Yatong Chen, Jialu Wang, Yang Liu

Machine learning systems are often used in settings where individuals adapt their features to obtain a desired outcome. In such settings, strategic behavior leads to a sharp loss in model performance in deployment. In this work, we aim to address this problem by learning classifiers that encourage decision subjects to change their features in a way that leads to improvement in both predicted \emph{and} true outcome. We frame the dynamics of prediction and adaptation as a two-stage game, and characterize optimal strategies for the model designer and its decision subjects. In benchmarks on simulated and real-world datasets, we find that classifiers trained using our method maintain the accuracy of existing approaches while inducing higher levels of improvement and less manipulation.