Haiqing Zhu

Haiqing Zhu, Tijana Zrnic, Celestine Mendler-Dünner

On many learning platforms, the optimization criteria guiding model training reflect the priorities of the designer rather than those of the individuals they affect. Consequently, users may act strategically to obtain more favorable outcomes, effectively contesting the platform's predictions. While past work has studied strategic user behavior on learning platforms, the focus has largely been on strategic responses to a deployed model, without considering the behavior of other users. In contrast, look-ahead reasoning takes into account that user actions are coupled, and -- at scale -- impact future predictions. Within this framework, we first formalize level-$k$ thinking, a concept from behavioral economics, where users aim to outsmart their peers by looking one step ahead. We show that, while convergence to an equilibrium is accelerated, the equilibrium remains the same, providing no benefit of higher-level reasoning for individuals in the long run. Then, we focus on collective reasoning, where users take coordinated actions by optimizing through their joint impact on the model. By contrasting collective with selfish behavior, we characterize the benefits and limits of coordination; a new notion of alignment between the learner's and the users' utilities emerges as a key concept. We discuss connections to several related mathematical frameworks, including strategic classification, performative prediction, and algorithmic collective action.

Haiqing Zhu, Lexing Xie, Yun Kuen Cheung

The prevalence of low-quality content on online platforms is often attributed to the absence of meaningful entry requirements. This motivates us to investigate whether implicit or explicit entry barriers, alongside appropriate reward mechanisms, can enhance content quality. We present the first game-theoretic analysis of two distinct types of entry barriers in online content platforms. The first, a structural barrier, emerges from the collective behaviour of incumbent content providers which disadvantages new entrants. We show that both rank-order and proportional-share reward mechanisms induce such a structural barrier at Nash equilibrium. The second, a strategic barrier, involves the platform proactively imposing entry fees to discourage participation from low-quality contributors. We consider a scheme in which the platform redirects some or all of the entry fees into the reward pool. We formally demonstrate that this approach can improve overall content quality. Our findings establish a theoretical foundation for designing reward mechanisms coupled with entry fees to promote higher-quality content and support healthier online ecosystems.