We study the effects of information discrepancy across sub-populations on their ability to simultaneously improve their features in strategic learning settings. Specifically, we consider a game where a principal deploys a decision rule in an attempt to optimize the whole population's welfare, and agents strategically adapt to it to receive better scores. Inspired by real-life settings, such as loan approvals and college admissions, we remove the typical assumption made in the strategic learning literature that the decision rule is fully known to the agents, and focus on settings where it is inaccessible. In their lack of knowledge, individuals try to infer this rule by learning from their peers (e.g., friends and acquaintances who previously applied for a loan), naturally forming groups in the population, each with possibly different type and level of information about the decision rule. In our equilibrium analysis, we show that the principal's decision rule optimizing the welfare across subgroups may cause a surprising negative externality; the true quality of some of the subgroups can actually deteriorate. On the positive side, we show that in many natural cases, optimal improvement is guaranteed simultaneously for all subgroups in equilibrium. We also characterize the disparity in improvements across subgroups via a measure of their informational overlap. Finally, we complement our theoretical analysis with experiments on real-world datasets.
翻译:我们研究各亚人口群体之间信息差异对其在战略学习环境中同时改善其特征的能力的影响。 具体地说, 我们考虑的是一种游戏, 由一位校长部署决策规则, 试图优化整个人口的福利, 以及代理者在战略上适应该规则以获得更好的分数。 受现实生活环境的启发, 如贷款批准和大学入学等, 我们删除了战略学习文献中典型的假设, 即决策规则完全为代理者所知, 并侧重于无法进入的环境。 在他们缺乏知识的情况下, 个人试图从他们的同龄人( 如以前申请贷款的朋友和熟人) 中学习来推导出这一规则, 从而自然地组成人口群体, 每个群体都可能具有不同类型和水平的信息, 从而获得更好的分数。 在平衡分析中, 我们显示, 校长决定规则优化各分组福利, 可能导致令人惊讶的负面外在性; 一些分组的真实质量实际上可能会恶化。 在积极的一面, 我们表明, 在许多自然案例中, 最佳的改进是保证所有分组在平衡中同时进行。 我们还通过一个理论分析来分析, 不同分组之间的实验中的差距与我们最后的理论分析。