Paper detail

Individual Fairness in Prophet Inequalities

Prophet inequalities are performance guarantees for online algorithms (a.k.a. stopping rules) solving the following "hiring problem": a decision maker sequentially inspects candidates whose values are independent random numbers and is asked to hire at most one candidate by selecting it before inspecting the values of future candidates in the sequence. A classic result in optimal stopping theory asserts that there exist stopping rules guaranteeing that the decision maker will hire a candidate whose expected value is at least half as good as the expected value of the candidate hired by a "prophet", i.e. one who has simultaneous access to the realizations of all candidates' values. Such stopping rules have provably good performance but might treat individual candidates unfairly in a number of different ways. In this work we identify two types of individual fairness that might be desirable in optimal stopping problems. We call them identity-independent fairness (IIF) and time-independent fairness (TIF) and give precise definitions in the context of the hiring problem. We give polynomial-time algorithms for finding the optimal IIF/TIF stopping rules for a given instance with discrete support and we manage to recover a prophet inequality with factor $1/2$ when the decision maker's stopping rule is required to satisfy both fairness properties while the prophet is unconstrained. We also explore worst-case ratios between optimal selection rules in the presence vs. absence of individual fairness constraints, in both the online and offline settings. Finally, we consider a framework in which the decision maker doesn't know the distributions of candidates' values but has access to independent samples from each distribution. We provide constant-competitive IIF/TIF algorithms using one sample per distribution in the offline setting and two samples per distribution in the online setting.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.