BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Ganesh Ghalme

Ganesh Ghalme contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningArtificial IntelligenceComputer Science and Game Theory

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Individual Fairness in Feature-Based Pricing for Monopoly Markets

We study fairness in the context of feature-based price discrimination in monopoly markets. We propose a new notion of individual fairness, namely, α-fairness, which guarantees that individuals with similar features face similar prices. First, we study discrete valuation space and give an analytical solution for optimal fair feature-based pricing. We show that the cost of fair pricing is defined as the ratio of expected revenue in an optimal feature-based pricing to the expected revenue in an optimal fair feature-based pricing (CoF) can be arbitrarily large in general. When the revenue function is continuous and concave with respect to the prices, we show that one can achieve CoF strictly less than 2, irrespective of the model parameters. Finally, we provide an algorithm to compute fair feature-based pricing strategy that achieves this CoF.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Long-Term Resource Allocation Fairness in Average Markov Decision Process (AMDP) Environment

Fairness has emerged as an important concern in automated decision-making in recent years, especially when these decisions affect human welfare. In this work, we study fairness in temporally extended decision-making settings, specifically those formulated as Markov Decision Processes (MDPs). Our proposed notion of fairness ensures that each state's long-term visitation frequency is at least a specified fraction. This quota-based notion of fairness is natural in many resource-allocation settings where the dynamics of a single resource being allocated is governed by an MDP and the distribution of the shared resource is captured by its state-visitation frequency. In an average-reward MDP (AMDP) setting, we formulate the problem as a bilinear saddle point program and, for a generative model, solve it using a Stochastic Mirror Descent (SMD) based algorithm. The proposed solution guarantees a simultaneous approximation on the expected average-reward and fairness requirement. We give sample complexity bounds for the proposed algorithm and validate our theoretical results with experiments on simulated data.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Mitigating Disparity while Maximizing Reward: Tight Anytime Guarantee for Improving Bandits

We study the Improving Multi-Armed Bandit (IMAB) problem, where the reward obtained from an arm increases with the number of pulls it receives. This model provides an elegant abstraction for many real-world problems in domains such as education and employment, where decisions about the distribution of opportunities can affect the future capabilities of communities and the disparity between them. A decision-maker in such settings must consider the impact of her decisions on future rewards in addition to the standard objective of maximizing her cumulative reward at any time. In many of these applications, the time horizon is unknown to the decision-maker beforehand, which motivates the study of the IMAB problem in the technically more challenging horizon-unaware setting. We study the tension that arises between two seemingly conflicting objectives in the horizon-unaware setting: a) maximizing the cumulative reward at any time based on current rewards of the arms, and b) ensuring that arms with better long-term rewards get sufficient opportunities even if they initially have low rewards. We show that, surprisingly, the two objectives are aligned with each other in this setting. Our main contribution is an anytime algorithm for the IMAB problem that achieves the best possible cumulative reward while ensuring that the arms reach their true potential given sufficient time. Our algorithm mitigates the initial disparity due to lack of opportunity and continues pulling an arm till it stops improving. We prove the optimality of our algorithm by showing that a) any algorithm for the IMAB problem, no matter how utilitarian, must suffer $Ω(T)$ policy regret and $Ω(k)$ competitive ratio with respect to the optimal offline policy, and b) the competitive ratio of our algorithm is $O(k)$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Strategic Representation

Humans have come to rely on machines for reducing excessive information to manageable representations. But this reliance can be abused -- strategic machines might craft representations that manipulate their users. How can a user make good choices based on strategic representations? We formalize this as a learning problem, and pursue algorithms for decision-making that are robust to manipulation. In our main setting of interest, the system represents attributes of an item to the user, who then decides whether or not to consume. We model this interaction through the lens of strategic classification (Hardt et al. 2016), reversed: the user, who learns, plays first; and the system, which responds, plays second. The system must respond with representations that reveal `nothing but the truth' but need not reveal the entire truth. Thus, the user faces the problem of learning set functions under strategic subset selection, which presents distinct algorithmic and statistical challenges. Our main result is a learning algorithm that minimizes error despite strategic representations, and our theoretical analysis sheds light on the trade-off between learning effort and susceptibility to manipulation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Ballooning Multi-Armed Bandits

In this paper, we introduce Ballooning Multi-Armed Bandits (BL-MAB), a novel extension of the classical stochastic MAB model. In the BL-MAB model, the set of available arms grows (or balloons) over time. In contrast to the classical MAB setting where the regret is computed with respect to the best arm overall, the regret in a BL-MAB setting is computed with respect to the best available arm at each time. We first observe that the existing stochastic MAB algorithms result in linear regret for the BL-MAB model. We prove that, if the best arm is equally likely to arrive at any time instant, a sub-linear regret cannot be achieved. Next, we show that if the best arm is more likely to arrive in the early rounds, one can achieve sub-linear regret. Our proposed algorithm determines (1) the fraction of the time horizon for which the newly arriving arms should be explored and (2) the sequence of arm pulls in the exploitation phase from among the explored arms. Making reasonable assumptions on the arrival distribution of the best arm in terms of the thinness of the distribution's tail, we prove that the proposed algorithm achieves sub-linear instance-independent regret. We further quantify explicit dependence of regret on the arrival distribution parameters. We reinforce our theoretical findings with extensive simulation results. We conclude by showing that our algorithm would achieve sub-linear regret even if (a) the distributional parameters are not exactly known, but are obtained using a reasonable learning mechanism or (b) the best arm is not more likely to arrive early, but a large fraction of arms is likely to arrive relatively early.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Achieving Fairness in the Stochastic Multi-armed Bandit Problem

We study an interesting variant of the stochastic multi-armed bandit problem, called the Fair-SMAB problem, where each arm is required to be pulled for at least a given fraction of the total available rounds. We investigate the interplay between learning and fairness in terms of a pre-specified vector denoting the fractions of guaranteed pulls. We define a fairness-aware regret, called $r$-Regret, that takes into account the above fairness constraints and naturally extends the conventional notion of regret. Our primary contribution is characterizing a class of Fair-SMAB algorithms by two parameters: the unfairness tolerance and the learning algorithm used as a black-box. We provide a fairness guarantee for this class that holds uniformly over time irrespective of the choice of the learning algorithm. In particular, when the learning algorithm is UCB1, we show that our algorithm achieves $O(\ln T)$ $r$-Regret. Finally, we evaluate the cost of fairness in terms of the conventional notion of regret.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access