Machine learning algorithms and their training datasets have grown substantially in both size and complexity over the past decade. This increased model complexity has made it challenging to interpret and predict their behavior in unobserved scenarios. Hence, many applications that involve societal decisions still rely on simple, interpretable models like linear regression, often after feature engineering. Examples of such applications include predicting national housing prices, estimating wages across industries, forecasting loan amounts across banks, predicting life insurance premiums across groups, and projecting energy consumption across communities [CGKMN24]. A shared safety and sometimes legal concern across the above applications is the potential for wildly different model qualities for different distributions, i.e., outputting a notably worse model for some source data distributions [Dat14; BS16; HPS16; VVB18; SBFVV19; BHJKR21; CGNSG23; Cho16; KLMR18; ADW19; CGKMN24; SVWZ24].

In settings where ML models are used to inform the allocation of resources, agents affected by the allocation decisions might have an incentive to strategically change their features to secure better outcomes. While prior work has studied strategic responses broadly, disentangling misreporting from genuine adaptation remains a fundamental challenge. In this paper, we propose a causally-motivated approach to identify and quantify how much an agent misreports on average by distinguishing deceptive changes in their features from genuine adaptation. Our key insight is that, unlike genuine adaptation, misreported features do not causally affect downstream variables (i.e., causal descendants). We exploit this asymmetry by comparing the causal effect of misreported features on their causal descendants as derived from manipulated datasets against those from unmanipulated datasets. We formally prove identifiability of the misreporting rate and characterize the variance of our estimator. We empirically validate our theoretical results using a semi-synthetic and real Medicare dataset with misreported data, demonstrating that our approach can be employed to identify misreporting in real-world scenarios.

For an LLM to correctly respond to an instruction it must understand both the semantics and the domain (i.e., subject area) of a given task-instruction pair. However, syntax can also convey implicit information. Recent work shows that syntactic templates--frequent sequences of Part-of-Speech (PoS) tags--are prevalent in training data and often appear in model outputs. In this work we characterize syntactic templates, domain, and semantics in task-instruction pairs. We identify cases of spurious correlations between syntax and domain, where models learn to associate a domain with syntax during training; this can sometimes override prompt semantics.

'There's no evidence that jobs go away, but there is a lot of evidence that as soon as you can dismantle full-time employment, companies will do that.' 'There's no evidence that jobs go away, but there is a lot of evidence that as soon as you can dismantle full-time employment, companies will do that.' Gig workers are endlessly exploited. As companies integrate AI and hire fewer employees, a shift toward a'gig economy' will commence The Guardian's journalism is independent. We will earn a commission if you buy something through an affiliate link.

Recent studies have shown LLMs possess some ability to improve their responses when given external feedback. However, it remains unclear how effectively and thoroughly these models can incorporate extrinsic feedback. In an ideal scenario, if LLMs receive near-perfect and complete feedback, we would expect them to fully integrate the feedback and reach correct solutions. In this paper, we systematically investigate LLMs' ability to incorporate feedback by designing a controlled experimental environment. For each problem, a solver model attempts a solution, then a feedback generator with access to near-complete ground-truth answers produces targeted feedback, after which the solver tries again. We evaluate this pipeline across a diverse range of tasks, including math reasoning, knowledge reasoning, scientific reasoning, and general multi-domain evaluations with state-of-the-art language models including Claude 3.7 with extended thinking.

Algorithmic fairness has emerged as a central issue in ML, and it has become standard practice to adjust ML algorithms so that they will satisfy fairness requirements such as Equal Opportunity. In this paper we consider the effects of adopting such fair classifiers on the overall level of ecosystem fairness. Specifically, we introduce the study of fairness with competing firms, and demonstrate the failure of fair classifiers in yielding fair ecosystems. Our results quantify the loss of fairness in systems, under a variety of conditions, based on classifiers' correlation and the level of their data overlap. We show that even if competing classifiers are individually fair, the ecosystem's outcome may be unfair; and that adjusting biased algorithms to improve their individual fairness may lead to an overall decline in ecosystem fairness. In addition to these theoretical results, we also provide supporting experimental evidence. Together, our model and results provide a novel and essential call for action.

Traditional Home Insurance Is Collapsing. A new, AI-assisted model of insurance is quietly exploding in disaster-prone areas--and may be coming for FEMA too. Is it the answer to climate change, or a trap? In 2019, when the worst flooding in recorded history spread across the entire Mississippi River basin, Colin Wellenkamp's phone rang for weeks. Wellenkamp runs a nonprofit called the Mississippi River Cities & Towns Initiative, which coordinates between mayors' offices in more than 100 river communities from northern Minnesota to southern Louisiana. As he describes it, his headquarters served as "one big virtual situation room" for relief agencies and municipalities up and down the central US.

We develop a statistical learning theory for gradient boosting applied to the estimation of covariate-dependent Generalized Pareto (GP) distributions in the context of Peaks-over-Threshold modeling. After an orthogonal reparametrization of the GP likelihood that diagonalizes its Fisher information matrix, we cast the estimation problem within the Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) framework and derive non-asymptotic error bounds for the boosting estimator. Our analysis accounts for three distinct sources of error in the process: statistical fluctuations, the approximation bias inherent to the asymptotic nature of the GP model-controlled under second-order regular variation-and the approximation error associated with the finite number of boosting iterates, making explicit the resulting bias-variance trade-off. We illustrate the practical benefits of the reparametrization through simulations, showing that it significantly reduces gradient correlation during training and improves convergence stability. The methodology is applied to a medical malpractice insurance dataset from the Texas Department of Insurance, comprising over 18 000 closed claims. The gradient boosting approach yields a good fit for the tail of settlement cost distributions and reveals that the number of days to settlement is the dominant predictor of tail heaviness, consistent with earlier findings in the reserving literature.

Follow this section to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens. Follow this tag to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW?

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei speaks during the World Economic Forum's annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, in January. Electronics maker NEC said Thursday that major Japanese financial institutions, including Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group and MS&AD Insurance Group Holdings, will participate in its strategic collaboration with U.S. startup Anthropic in the field of artificial intelligence. The partnership aims to improve the quality of financial services for customers using AI and to strengthen measures against cyberattacks. The other companies are Sumitomo Life Insurance, Daiwa Securities Group, Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Group, Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank and Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance. Using Anthropic's AI technology, the partners will work not only on developing new services but also on improving productivity by streamlining business processes at each company.