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

Omer Ben-Porat

Omer Ben-Porat contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceComputer Science and Game TheoryMachine LearningInformation RetrievalComputation and Languagecs.CYHuman-Computer Interaction

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - Emerging
9works
0followers
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

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

9 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

From Actions to Words: Towards Abstractive-Textual Policy Summarization in RL

Explaining reinforcement learning agents is challenging because policies emerge from complex reward structures and neural representations that are difficult for humans to interpret. Existing approaches often rely on curated demonstrations that expose local behaviors but provide limited insight into an agent's global strategy, leaving users to infer intent from raw observations. We propose SySLLM (Synthesized Summary using Large Language Models), a framework that reframes policy interpretation as a language-generation problem. Instead of visual demonstrations, SySLLM converts spatiotemporal trajectories into structured text and prompts an LLM to generate coherent summaries describing the agent's goals, exploration style, and decision patterns. SySLLM scales to long-horizon, semantically rich environments without task-specific fine-tuning, leveraging LLM world knowledge and compositional reasoning to capture latent behavioral structure across policies. Expert evaluations show strong alignment with human analyses, and a large-scale user study found that 75.5% of participants preferred SySLLM summaries over state-of-the-art demonstration-based explanations. Together, these results position abstractive textual summarization as a paradigm for interpreting complex RL behavior.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2026arXiv

LLM Performance Predictors: Learning When to Escalate in Hybrid Human-AI Moderation Systems

As LLMs are increasingly integrated into human-in-the-loop content moderation systems, a central challenge is deciding when their outputs can be trusted versus when escalation for human review is preferable. We propose a novel framework for supervised LLM uncertainty quantification, learning a dedicated meta-model based on LLM Performance Predictors (LPPs) derived from LLM outputs: log-probabilities, entropy, and novel uncertainty attribution indicators. We demonstrate that our method enables cost-aware selective classification in real-world human-AI workflows: escalating high-risk cases while automating the rest. Experiments across state-of-the-art LLMs, including both off-the-shelf (Gemini, GPT) and open-source (Llama, Qwen), on multimodal and multilingual moderation tasks, show significant improvements over existing uncertainty estimators in accuracy-cost trade-offs. Beyond uncertainty estimation, the LPPs enhance explainability by providing new insights into failure conditions (e.g., ambiguous content vs. under-specified policy). This work establishes a principled framework for uncertainty-aware, scalable, and responsible human-AI moderation workflows.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2023arXiv

Principal-Agent Reward Shaping in MDPs

Principal-agent problems arise when one party acts on behalf of another, leading to conflicts of interest. The economic literature has extensively studied principal-agent problems, and recent work has extended this to more complex scenarios such as Markov Decision Processes (MDPs). In this paper, we further explore this line of research by investigating how reward shaping under budget constraints can improve the principal's utility. We study a two-player Stackelberg game where the principal and the agent have different reward functions, and the agent chooses an MDP policy for both players. The principal offers an additional reward to the agent, and the agent picks their policy selfishly to maximize their reward, which is the sum of the original and the offered reward. Our results establish the NP-hardness of the problem and offer polynomial approximation algorithms for two classes of instances: Stochastic trees and deterministic decision processes with a finite horizon.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Protecting the Protected Group: Circumventing Harmful Fairness

Machine Learning (ML) algorithms shape our lives. Banks use them to determine if we are good borrowers; IT companies delegate them recruitment decisions; police apply ML for crime-prediction, and judges base their verdicts on ML. However, real-world examples show that such automated decisions tend to discriminate against protected groups. This potential discrimination generated a huge hype both in media and in the research community. Quite a few formal notions of fairness were proposed, which take a form of constraints a "fair" algorithm must satisfy. We focus on scenarios where fairness is imposed on a self-interested party (e.g., a bank that maximizes its revenue). We find that the disadvantaged protected group can be worse off after imposing a fairness constraint. We introduce a family of \textit{Welfare-Equalizing} fairness constraints that equalize per-capita welfare of protected groups, and include \textit{Demographic Parity} and \textit{Equal Opportunity} as particular cases. In this family, we characterize conditions under which the fairness constraint helps the disadvantaged group. We also characterize the structure of the optimal \textit{Welfare-Equalizing} classifier for the self-interested party, and provide an algorithm to compute it. Overall, our \textit{Welfare-Equalizing} fairness approach provides a unified framework for discussing fairness in classification in the presence of a self-interested party.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Fiduciary Bandits

Recommendation systems often face exploration-exploitation tradeoffs: the system can only learn about the desirability of new options by recommending them to some user. Such systems can thus be modeled as multi-armed bandit settings; however, users are self-interested and cannot be made to follow recommendations. We ask whether exploration can nevertheless be performed in a way that scrupulously respects agents' interests---i.e., by a system that acts as a fiduciary. More formally, we introduce a model in which a recommendation system faces an exploration-exploitation tradeoff under the constraint that it can never recommend any action that it knows yields lower reward in expectation than an agent would achieve if it acted alone. Our main contribution is a positive result: an asymptotically optimal, incentive compatible, and ex-ante individually rational recommendation algorithm.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Learning under Invariable Bayesian Safety

A recent body of work addresses safety constraints in explore-and-exploit systems. Such constraints arise where, for example, exploration is carried out by individuals whose welfare should be balanced with overall welfare. In this paper, we adopt a model inspired by recent work on a bandit-like setting for recommendations. We contribute to this line of literature by introducing a safety constraint that should be respected in every round and determines that the expected value in each round is above a given threshold. Due to our modeling, the safe explore-and-exploit policy deserves careful planning, or otherwise, it will lead to sub-optimal welfare. We devise an asymptotically optimal algorithm for the setting and analyze its instance-dependent convergence rate.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Optimizing Long-term Social Welfare in Recommender Systems: A Constrained Matching Approach

Most recommender systems (RS) research assumes that a user's utility can be maximized independently of the utility of the other agents (e.g., other users, content providers). In realistic settings, this is often not true---the dynamics of an RS ecosystem couple the long-term utility of all agents. In this work, we explore settings in which content providers cannot remain viable unless they receive a certain level of user engagement. We formulate the recommendation problem in this setting as one of equilibrium selection in the induced dynamical system, and show that it can be solved as an optimal constrained matching problem. Our model ensures the system reaches an equilibrium with maximal social welfare supported by a sufficiently diverse set of viable providers. We demonstrate that even in a simple, stylized dynamical RS model, the standard myopic approach to recommendation---always matching a user to the best provider---performs poorly. We develop several scalable techniques to solve the matching problem, and also draw connections to various notions of user regret and fairness, arguing that these outcomes are fairer in a utilitarian sense.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Predicting Strategic Behavior from Free Text

The connection between messaging and action is fundamental both to web applications, such as web search and sentiment analysis, and to economics. However, while prominent online applications exploit messaging in natural (human) language in order to predict non-strategic action selection, the economics literature focuses on the connection between structured stylized messaging to strategic decisions in games and multi-agent encounters. This paper aims to connect these two strands of research, which we consider highly timely and important due to the vast online textual communication on the web. Particularly, we introduce the following question: can free text expressed in natural language serve for the prediction of action selection in an economic context, modeled as a game? In order to initiate the research on this question, we introduce the study of an individual's action prediction in a one-shot game based on free text he/she provides, while being unaware of the game to be played. We approach the problem by attributing commonsensical personality attributes via crowd-sourcing to free texts written by individuals, and employing transductive learning to predict actions taken by these individuals in one-shot games based on these attributes. Our approach allows us to train a single classifier that can make predictions with respect to actions taken in multiple games. In experiments with three well-studied games, our algorithm compares favorably with strong alternative approaches. In ablation analysis, we demonstrate the importance of our modeling choices---the representation of the text with the commonsensical personality attributes and our classifier---to the predictive power of our model.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Privacy, Altruism, and Experience: Estimating the Perceived Value of Internet Data for Medical Uses

People increasingly turn to the Internet when they have a medical condition. The data they create during this process is a valuable source for medical research and for future health services. However, utilizing these data could come at a cost to user privacy. Thus, it is important to balance the perceived value that users assign to these data with the value of the services derived from them. Here we describe experiments where methods from Mechanism Design were used to elicit a truthful valuation from users for their Internet data and for services to screen people for medical conditions. In these experiments, 880 people from around the world were asked to participate in an auction to provide their data for uses differing in their contribution to the participant, to society, and in the disease they addressed. Some users were offered monetary compensation for their participation, while others were asked to pay to participate. Our findings show that 99\% of people were willing to contribute their data in exchange for monetary compensation and an analysis of their data, while 53\% were willing to pay to have their data analyzed. The average perceived value users assigned to their data was estimated at US\$49. Their value to screen them for a specific cancer was US\$22 while the value of this service offered to the general public was US\$22. Participants requested higher compensation when notified that their data would be used to analyze a more severe condition. They were willing to pay more to have their data analyzed when the condition was more severe, when they had higher education or if they had recently experienced a serious medical condition.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access