Figure 3: Comparison of the proposed Algorithm 1 (i.e., LUB-CDM) and the straightforward strategy. 's expected payoff, where the improvement is at the cost of P In this example, we compare the proposed Algorithm 1 with the patient strategy, where the latter method pulls arms according to the latent utility at the beginning stage but has more strategic behaviors as the matching proceeds. Adachi's model involves a stage discount Figure 4: Performance of the proposed Algorithm 1 (i.e., LUB-CDM) and the patient strategy. 's reservation utility under the LUB-CDM given by Note that LUB-CDM has less strategic behaviors as the matching proceeds. On the other hand, the patient strategy has more strategic behaviors as the matching proceeds.

Discrete choice models (DCMs) are used to analyze individual decision-making in contexts such as transportation choices, political elections, and consumer preferences. DCMs play a central role in applied econometrics by enabling inference on key economic variables, such as marginal rates of substitution, rather than focusing solely on predicting choices on new unlabeled data. However, while traditional DCMs offer high interpretability and support for point and interval estimation of economic quantities, these models often underperform in predictive tasks compared to deep learning (DL) models. Despite their predictive advantages, DL models remain largely underutilized in discrete choice due to concerns about their lack of interpretability, unstable parameter estimates, and the absence of established methods for uncertainty quantification. Here, we introduce a deep learning model architecture specifically designed to integrate with approximate Bayesian inference methods, such as Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics (SGLD). Our proposed model collapses to be-haviorally informed hypotheses when data is limited, mitigating overfitting and instability in underspecified settings while retaining the flexibility to capture complex nonlinear relationships when sufficient data is available. We demonstrate our approach using SGLD through a Monte Carlo simulation study, evaluating both predictive metrics--such as out-of-sample balanced accuracy--and inferential metrics--such as empirical coverage for marginal rates of substitution interval estimates. Additionally, we present results from two empirical case studies: one using revealed mode choice data in NYC, and the other based on the widely used Swiss train choice stated preference data. Introduction Discrete choice is a fundamental area of econometrics that examines how individuals make decisions among a finite set of alternatives. For example, in transportation systems, discrete choice models are often used to estimate individuals' willingness to pay for a reduction in travel time, considering factors such as cost, trip duration, level of service, and other attributes of competing transportation modes. Given that inference is fundamental in the discrete choice field, researchers often rely on transparent and interpretable statistical binary or multinomial classification models such as logistic and probit regressions, along with their more complex variations. Traditional discrete choice models (DCMs) allow for point and interval estimation of key economic quantities, including marginal rates of substitution and odds ratios.

We introduce a novel model architecture that incorporates network effects into discrete choice problems, achieving higher predictive performance than standard discrete choice models while offering greater interpretability than general-purpose flexible model classes. Econometric discrete choice models aid in studying individual decision-making, where agents select the option with the highest reward from a discrete set of alternatives. Intuitively, the utility an individual derives from a particular choice depends on their personal preferences and characteristics, the attributes of the alternative, and the value their peers assign to that alternative or their previous choices. However, most applications ignore peer influence, and models that do consider peer or network effects often lack the flexibility and predictive performance of recently developed approaches to discrete choice, such as deep learning. We propose a novel graph convolutional neural network architecture to model network effects in discrete choices, achieving higher predictive performance than standard discrete choice models while retaining the interpretability necessary for inference--a quality often lacking in general-purpose deep learning architectures. We evaluate our architecture using revealed commuting choice data, extended with travel times and trip costs for each travel mode for work-related trips in New York City, as well as 2016 U.S. election data aggregated by county, to test its performance on datasets with highly imbalanced classes. Given the interpretability of our models, we can estimate relevant economic metrics, such as the value of travel time savings in New York City. Finally, we compare the predictive performance and behavioral insights from our architecture to those derived from traditional discrete choice and general-purpose deep learning models.

We consider the problem of subset selection where one is given multiple rankings of items and the goal is to select the highest ``quality'' subset. Score functions from the multiwinner voting literature have been used to aggregate rankings into quality scores for subsets. We study this setting of subset selection problems when, in addition, rankings may contain systemic or unconscious biases toward a group of items. For a general model of input rankings and biases, we show that requiring the selected subset to satisfy group fairness constraints can improve the quality of the selection with respect to unbiased rankings. Importantly, we show that for fairness constraints to be effective, different multiwinner score functions may require a drastically different number of rankings: While for some functions, fairness constraints need an exponential number of rankings to recover a close-to-optimal solution, for others, this dependency is only polynomial. This result relies on a novel notion of ``smoothness'' of submodular functions in this setting that quantifies how well a function can ``correctly'' assess the quality of items in the presence of bias. The results in this paper can be used to guide the choice of multiwinner score functions for the subset selection setting considered here; we additionally provide a tool to empirically enable this.

Subset selection tasks, arise in recommendation systems and search engines and ask to select a subset of items that maximize the value for the user. The values of subsets often display diminishing returns, and hence, submodular functions have been used to model them. If the inputs defining the submodular function are known, then existing algorithms can be used. In many applications, however, inputs have been observed to have social biases that reduce the utility of the output subset. Hence, interventions to improve the utility are desired. Prior works focus on maximizing linear functions -- a special case of submodular functions -- and show that fairness constraint-based interventions can not only ensure proportional representation but also achieve near-optimal utility in the presence of biases. We study the maximization of a family of submodular functions that capture functions arising in the aforementioned applications. Our first result is that, unlike linear functions, constraint-based interventions cannot guarantee any constant fraction of the optimal utility for this family of submodular functions. Our second result is an algorithm for submodular maximization. The algorithm provably outputs subsets that have near-optimal utility for this family under mild assumptions and that proportionally represent items from each group. In empirical evaluation, with both synthetic and real-world data, we observe that this algorithm improves the utility of the output subset for this family of submodular functions over baselines.

Choice modeling has been a central topic in the study of individual preference or utility across many fields including economics, marketing, operations research, and psychology. While the vast majority of the literature on choice models has been devoted to the analytical properties that lead to managerial and policy-making insights, the existing methods to learn a choice model from empirical data are often either computationally intractable or sample inefficient. In this paper, we develop deep learning-based choice models under two settings of choice modeling: (i) feature-free and (ii) feature-based. Our model captures both the intrinsic utility for each candidate choice and the effect that the assortment has on the choice probability. Synthetic and real data experiments demonstrate the performances of proposed models in terms of the recovery of the existing choice models, sample complexity, assortment effect, architecture design, and model interpretation.

In selection processes such as hiring, promotion, and college admissions, implicit bias toward socially-salient attributes such as race, gender, or sexual orientation of candidates is known to produce persistent inequality and reduce aggregate utility for the decision maker. Interventions such as the Rooney Rule and its generalizations, which require the decision maker to select at least a specified number of individuals from each affected group, have been proposed to mitigate the adverse effects of implicit bias in selection. Recent works have established that such lower-bound constraints can be very effective in improving aggregate utility in the case when each individual belongs to at most one affected group. However, in several settings, individuals may belong to multiple affected groups and, consequently, face more extreme implicit bias due to this intersectionality. We consider independently drawn utilities and show that, in the intersectional case, the aforementioned non-intersectional constraints can only recover part of the total utility achievable in the absence of implicit bias. On the other hand, we show that if one includes appropriate lower-bound constraints on the intersections, almost all the utility achievable in the absence of implicit bias can be recovered. Thus, intersectional constraints can offer a significant advantage over a reductionist dimension-by-dimension non-intersectional approach to reducing inequality.

Matching markets are often organized in a multi-stage and decentralized manner. Moreover, participants in real-world matching markets often have uncertain preferences. This article develops a framework for learning optimal strategies in such settings, based on a nonparametric statistical approach and variational analysis. We propose an efficient algorithm, built upon concepts of "lower uncertainty bound" and "calibrated decentralized matching," for maximizing the participants' expected payoff. We show that there exists a welfare-versus-fairness trade-off that is characterized by the uncertainty level of acceptance. Participants will strategically act in favor of a low uncertainty level to reduce competition and increase expected payoff. We study signaling mechanisms that help to clear the congestion in such decentralized markets and find that the effects of signaling are heterogeneous, showing a dependence on the participants and matching stages. We prove that participants can be better off with multi-stage matching compared to single-stage matching. The deferred acceptance procedure assumes no limit on the number of stages and attains efficiency and fairness but may make some participants worse off than multi-stage matching. We demonstrate aspects of the theoretical predictions through simulations and an experiment using real data from college admissions.

The multinomial probit Bayesian additive regression trees (MPBART) framework was proposed by Kindo et al. (KD), approximating the latent utilities in the multinomial probit (MNP) model with BART (Chipman et al. 2010). Compared to multinomial logistic models, MNP does not assume independent alternatives and the correlation structure among alternatives can be specified through multivariate Gaussian distributed latent utilities. We introduce two new algorithms for fitting the MPBART and show that the theoretical mixing rates of our proposals are equal or superior to the existing algorithm in KD. Through simulations, we explore the robustness of the methods to the choice of reference level, imbalance in outcome frequencies, and the specifications of prior hyperparameters for the utility error term. The work is motivated by the application of generating posterior predictive distributions for mortality and engagement in care among HIV-positive patients based on electronic health records (EHRs) from the Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare (AMPATH) in Kenya. In both the application and simulations, we observe better performance using our proposals as compared to KD in terms of MCMC convergence rate and posterior predictive accuracy.

We study two-sided decentralized matching markets in which participants have uncertain preferences. We present a statistical model to learn the preferences. The model incorporates uncertain state and the participants' competition on one side of the market. We derive an optimal strategy that maximizes the agent's expected payoff and calibrate the uncertain state by taking the opportunity costs into account. We discuss the sense in which the matching derived from the proposed strategy has a stability property. We also prove a fairness property that asserts that there exists no justified envy according to the proposed strategy. We provide numerical results to demonstrate the improved payoff, stability and fairness, compared to alternative methods.