arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1808.07569

Robust Counterfactual Inferences using Feature Learning and their Applications

Abstract

In a wide variety of applications, including personalization, we want to measure the difference in outcome due to an intervention and thus have to deal with counterfactual inference. The feedback from a customer in any of these situations is only 'bandit feedback' - that is, a partial feedback based on whether we chose to intervene or not. Typically randomized experiments are carried out to understand whether an intervention is overall better than no intervention. Here we present a feature learning algorithm to learn from a randomized experiment where the intervention in consideration is most effective and where it is least effective rather than only focusing on the overall impact, thus adding a context to our learning mechanism and extract more information. From the randomized experiment, we learn the feature representations which divide the population into subpopulations where we observe statistically significant difference in average customer feedback between those who were subjected to the intervention and those who were not, with a level of significance l, where l is a configurable parameter in our model. We use this information to derive the value of the intervention in consideration for each instance in the population. With experiments, we show that using this additional learning, in future interventions, the context for each instance could be leveraged to decide whether to intervene or not.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Abhimanyu Mitra, Kannan Achan, Sushant Kumar. 2018-08-22. Robust Counterfactual Inferences using Feature Learning and their Applications. https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.07569

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI