Selection Bias

Actionable recourse studies whether individuals can modify feasible features to overturn unfavorable outcomes produced by AI-assisted decision-support systems. However, many such systems operate in competitive settings, such as admission or hiring, where only a fraction of candidates can succeed. A fundamental question arises: what happens when actionable recourse is available to everyone in a competitive environment? This study proposes a framework that models recourse as a strategic interaction among candidates under a risk-based selection rule. Rejected individuals exert effort to improve actionable features along directions implied by the decision rule, while the success benchmark evolves endogenously as many candidates adjust simultaneously. This creates endogenous selection, in which both the decision rule and the selection threshold are determined by the population's current feature state. This interaction generates a closed-loop dynamical system linking candidate selection and strategic recourse. We show that the initially selected candidates determine both the benchmark of success and the direction of improvement, thereby amplifying initial disparities and producing persistent performance gaps across the population.

For LLM trading agents to be genuinely trustworthy, they must demonstrate understanding of market dynamics rather than exploitation of memorized ticker associations. Building responsible multi-agent systems demands rigorous signal validation: proving that predictions reflect legitimate patterns, not pre-trained recall. We address two sources of spurious performance: memorization bias from ticker-specific pre-training, and survivorship bias from flawed backtesting. Our approach is to blindfold the agents--anonymizing all identifiers--and verify whether meaningful signals persist. BlindTrade anonymizes tickers and company names, and four LLM agents output scores along with reasoning. We construct a GNN graph from reasoning embeddings and trade using PPO-DSR policy. On 2025 YTD (through 2025-08-01), we achieved Sharpe 1.40 +/- 0.22 across 20 seeds and validated signal legitimacy through negative control experiments. To assess robustness beyond a single OOS window, we additionally evaluate an extended period (2024--2025), revealing market-regime dependency: the policy excels in volatile conditions but shows reduced alpha in trending bull markets.

Bias can be introduced in diverse ways in machine learning datasets, for example via selection or label bias. Although these bias types in themselves have an influence on important aspects of fair machine learning, their different impact has been understudied. In this work, we empirically analyze the effect of label bias and several subtypes of selection bias on the evaluation of classification models, on their performance, and on the effectiveness of bias mitigation methods. We also introduce a biasing and evaluation framework that allows to model fair worlds and their biased counterparts through the introduction of controlled bias in real-life datasets with low discrimination. Using our framework, we empirically analyze the impact of each bias type independently, while obtaining a more representative evaluation of models and mitigation methods than with the traditional use of a subset of biased data as test set. Our results highlight different factors that influence how impactful bias is on model performance. They also show an absence of trade-off between fairness and accuracy, and between individual and group fairness, when models are evaluated on a test set that does not exhibit unwanted bias. They furthermore indicate that the performance of bias mitigation methods is influenced by the type of bias present in the data. Our findings call for future work to develop more accurate evaluations of prediction models and fairness interventions, but also to better understand other types of bias, more complex scenarios involving the combination of different bias types, and other factors that impact the efficiency of the mitigation methods, such as dataset characteristics.

In the social sciences, it is often necessary to debias studies and surveys before valid conclusions can be drawn. Debiasing algorithms enable the computational removal of bias using sample weights. However, an issue arises when only a subset of features is highly biased, while the rest is already representative. Algorithms need to strongly alter the sample distribution to manage a few highly biased features, which can in turn introduce bias into already representative variables. To address this issue, we developed a method that uses feature weights to minimize the impact of highly biased features on the computation of sample weights. Our algorithm is based on Maximum Representative Subsampling (MRS), which debiases datasets by aligning a non-representative sample with a representative one through iterative removal of elements to create a representative subsample. The new algorithm, named feature-weighted MRS (FW-MRS), decreases the emphasis on highly biased features, allowing it to retain more instances for downstream tasks. The feature weights are derived from the feature importance of a domain classifier trained to differentiate between the representative and non-representative datasets. We validated FW-MRS using eight tabular datasets, each of which we artificially biased. Biased features can be important for downstream tasks, and focusing less on them could lead to a decline in generalization. For this reason, we assessed the generalization performance of FW-MRS on downstream tasks and found no statistically significant differences. Additionally, FW-MRS was applied to a real-world dataset from the social sciences. The source code is available at https://github.com/kramerlab/FeatureWeightDebiasing.

Data collection is a critical component of modern statistical and machine learning pipelines, particularly when data must be gathered from multiple heterogeneous sources to study a target population of interest. In many use cases, such as medical studies or political polling, different sources incur different sampling costs. Observations often have associated group identities - for example, health markers, demographics, or political affiliations - and the relative composition of these groups may differ substantially, both among the source populations and between sources and target population. In this work, we study multi-source data collection under a fixed budget, focusing on the estimation of population means and group-conditional means. We show that naive data collection strategies (e.g. attempting to "match" the target distribution) or relying on standard estimators (e.g. sample mean) can be highly suboptimal. Instead, we develop a sampling plan which maximizes the effective sample size - the total sample size divided by $D_{χ^2}(q\mid\mid\overline{p}) + 1$, where $q$ is the target distribution, $\overline{p}$ is the aggregated source distribution, and $D_{χ^2}$ is the $χ^2$-divergence. We pair this sampling plan with a classical post-stratification estimator and upper bound its risk. We provide matching lower bounds, establishing that our approach achieves the budgeted minimax optimal risk. Our techniques also extend to prediction problems when minimizing the excess risk, providing a principled approach to multi-source learning with costly and heterogeneous data sources.

We revisit the problem of estimating $k$ linear regressors with self-selection bias in $d$ dimensions with the maximum selection criterion, as introduced by Cherapanamjeri, Daskalakis, Ilyas, and Zampetakis [CDIZ23, STOC'23]. Our main result is a $\mathrm{poly}(d, k, 1/\varepsilon) + (k \log k)^{O(k)}$ time algorithm for this problem that improves upon the running time of the algorithms by Cherapanamjeri, Daskalakis, Ilyas, and Zampetakis [CDIZ23] and Gaitonde and Mossel [GM24, arXiv]. We achieve this by providing the first local convergence algorithm for self-selection, thus resolving one of the main open questions of Cherapanamjeri, Daskalakis, Ilyas, and Zampetakis [CDIZ23]. To obtain this algorithm, we reduce self-selection to a seemingly unrelated statistical problem called estimation under coarsening [FKKT21, COLT'21]. Coarsening occurs when one does not observe the exact value of the sample but only some set (from a partition of the sample space) containing the exact value. Inference from coarse samples arises in various real-world applications, including rounding by humans and algorithms, limited precision of instruments, and lag in multi-agent systems. The coarse estimation problem arising in our reduction is induced by a non-convex partition, whereas previous works on coarsening exclusively studied convex partitions. The resulting estimation algorithm relies on the geometry of the self-selection problem to bypass non-convexity. This geometric approach, in turn, enables us to overcome the limitations of previous analytic approaches and could have applications for designing efficient algorithms for other latent-variable problems.

The empirical risk minimization approach to data-driven decision making requires access to training data drawn under the same conditions as those that will be faced when the decision rule is deployed. However, in a number of settings, we may be concerned that our training sample is biased in the sense that some groups (characterized by either observable or unobservable attributes) may be under- or over-represented relative to the general population; and in this setting empirical risk minimization over the training set may fail to yield rules that perform well at deployment. We propose a model of sampling bias called conditional $Γ$-biased sampling, where observed covariates can affect the probability of sample selection arbitrarily much but the amount of unexplained variation in the probability of sample selection is bounded by a constant factor. Applying the distributionally robust optimization framework, we propose a method for learning a decision rule that minimizes the worst-case risk incurred under a family of test distributions that can generate the training distribution under $Γ$-biased sampling. We apply a result of Rockafellar and Uryasev to show that this problem is equivalent to an augmented convex risk minimization problem. We give statistical guarantees for learning a model that is robust to sampling bias via the method of sieves, and propose a deep learning algorithm whose loss function captures our robust learning target. We empirically validate our proposed method in a case study on prediction of mental health scores from health survey data and a case study on ICU length of stay prediction.