Abstract:Push notification is a critical recommendation scenario on large-scale platforms, allowing the system to proactively reach users outside the application to improve long-term re-engagement. However, designing an optimal push system requires handling a complex action space for the "whether and when" delivery problem under strict system resource constraints. Existing solutions typically fall into two passive paradigms: pre-planned frequency methods that allocate delivery times via offline modeling, limiting real-time adaptability; and fixed-interval triggering methods that periodically poll the system, creating a strict dilemma between excessive computational overhead and diminished optimal timing capture. Furthermore, such multi-stage frameworks severely suffer from local optima. To overcome these limitations, in this paper, we propose STEPS, a proactive, Self-Triggered End-to-end Agentic Push Recommendation System, which is already fully deployed at Douyin with over 1 billion users. STEPS reformulates push recommendation as a self-triggered agentic process in which the system decides not only whether to send a push, but also when to invoke itself again, thereby forming a closed loop that balances real-time effectiveness and efficiency. Specifically, STEPS consists of two decision transformer-based agents: a planning agent that schedules the next system invocation using a gated ordinal regression method, and an execution agent that decides whether to send a push based on trajectory rewards. Furthermore, we introduce a lightweight filtering agent to both control computational overhead and act as a crucial safeguard against unreasonable planning behaviors. Online A/B testing demonstrates that STEPS significantly increases user active days by 0.2843% and reduces the push permission disablement rate by 1.9089%, while the filtering agent reduces computational overhead by 79.42%.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on reward models to align their outputs with diverse user preferences. While personalized reward models aim to capture such heterogeneity, they are often trained on imbalanced user preference data and may therefore favor users whose preferences are more common in the training population. In this paper, we identify this failure mode as personalized reward bias, where reward modeling quality varies systematically with preference support rate. We formulate its mitigation as a Pareto fairness problem over group utilities, aiming to improve under-served users without degrading other user groups. To this end, we propose PAFO, a Pareto fairness optimization framework for personalized reward modeling. PAFO first trains group-specialized reward models for majority and minority preference groups, then constructs conditional margin-level supervision to distill their heterogeneous preference boundaries into a single unified model. The resulting model uses group information only during training and requires no explicit group labels at inference time. Experiments on Personal-LLM and DSP show that PAFO improves both minority-group and majority-group accuracy while reducing user-level unfairness across multiple metrics, demonstrating its effectiveness for fairer LLM personalization.
Abstract:Strategic classification (SC) investigates scenarios where agents manipulate their features to obtain favorable decisions from predictive models. Existing fairness-aware SC approaches primarily focus on group fairness and typically assume that agents respond independently. However, when individual fairness is required, ensuring similar individuals receive similar outcomes, agents' manipulation becomes interdependent: an agent's preferred manipulation depends on the neighborhoods' outcomes. This induces a mismatch between classical SC formulations and fairness-aware decision settings, where independent models no longer accurately characterize strategic manipulations. To address this issue, we introduce individual fairness-aware strategic classification (IFSC), a framework that models peer-driven manipulation arising from individual fairness, where agents imitate nearby positively decided peers to obtain favorable outcomes. IFSC characterizes strategic manipulation as similarity-based imitation toward visible accepted peers and learns classifiers under the resulting post-manipulation distributions. To account for uncertainty in peer observability, IFSC employs a robust learning process that introduces stochastic perturbations during manipulation simulation. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that IFSC improves individual-fairness consistency and mitigates imitation-induced distortions.
Abstract:Strategic machine learning investigates scenarios where agents manipulate their features to receive favorable decisions from predictive models. To address fairness concerns intrinsic to strategic classification, recent work has introduced group-specific fairness constraints. However, current fairness-aware approaches face a fundamental dilemma in the issue of fairness exposure: making these constraints public enables strategic manipulation and can lead to fairness reversal, while keeping them hidden may reduce social welfare and discourage genuine improvement. To fill this gap, we subsequently propose the problem of partial fairness awareness (PFA), as our theoretical analysis informs that such a dilemma can be mitigated by releasing the candidate set of fairness constraints and concealing the grounding constraint. To be specific, we introduce a belief-guided strategic mechanism, wherein agents iteratively interact with the decision system and maintain a belief distribution over the candidate set of fairness constraints. This belief-guided process enables agents, through iterative interaction and feedback, to update their belief distribution over the candidate set, thereby gradually aligning their belief with the grounding fairness constraint employed by the system. Extensive experiments on real-world and synthetic datasets demonstrate that PFA achieves lower group fairness gaps, higher acceptance of truly qualified individuals, and more stable outcomes compared to fully public or private fairness regimes.
Abstract:As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in social contexts such as emotional companionship and customer service, measuring their social intelligence has become critical to the quality and safety of human-AI interaction. However, existing social intelligence benchmarks lack a unified framework that organizes social abilities into a unified structure, and therefore cannot enable fine-grained diagnosis. To build the first holistic diagnostic evaluation grounded in social theory, we first construct a social intelligence framework through a literature review and multi-stage expert validation guided by psychometric principles. The resulting framework includes 4 categories and 11 dimensions, each further specified by fine-grained capability facets. Building on this framework, we introduce NICE (Norm, Interaction, Cognition, Experience), a diagnostic benchmark of 137 items operationalized through representative Chinese contexts. Across 5 frontier LLMs and a human reference group, models score higher in aggregate accuracy yet show a consistent weakness in Communication, which the framework localizes to 3 specific capability facets: multi-turn communication, nonverbal communication, and synchrony. NICE thus reframes social intelligence evaluation toward theory-grounded diagnosis of socially consequential weaknesses in LLMs.
Abstract:Tabular foundation models based on pretrained prior-data fitted networks~(PFNs) have shown strong generalization on diverse tabular tasks, but they are typically designed for \emph{non-strategic} settings where data distributions are independent of deployed classifiers. In many real-world decision scenarios, however, individuals may strategically modify their features after deployment to obtain favorable outcomes, inducing a post-deployment distribution shift. This paper studies whether PFN-style tabular foundation models can generalize to such \emph{strategic} tabular data. We show that strategic manipulation creates a mismatch between the non-strategic prior learned during pretraining and the post-manipulation strategic prior, which leads to systematic prediction bias. To address this issue, we propose \textbf{Strategic Prior-data Fitted Network}~\textit{(SPN)}, an inference-time strategy-aware framework that adapts tabular foundation models to strategic environments without retraining. SPN constructs strategic in-context examples to approximate post-manipulation inputs and aligns PFN predictions with the induced strategic distribution. Experiments on real-world and synthetic tabular datasets show that SPN consistently improves robustness and predictive performance under strategic manipulation compared with both tabular foundation models and classical tabular methods.
Abstract:Strategic classification(SC) studies the interaction between decision models and agents who strategically manipulate their features for favorable outcomes. Existing SC frameworks typically rely on the idealized assumption that agents are strictly rational. However, evidence from behavioral economics and psychology consistently shows that real-world decision-making is often shaped by cognitive biases, deviating from pure rationality. To formalize this limitation, we identify and define a new problem setting, termed the behaviorally realistic strategic classification problem, where agents' strategic manipulations deviate from full rationality due to psychological biases. Motivated by the identified limitation, we propose the Prospect-Guided Strategic Framework (Pro-SF) to address the problem, a principled framework grounded in prospect theory to model and learn under behaviorally realistic strategic responses. Specifically, to capture behaviorally realistic strategic manipulations, our framework reformulates the Stackelberg-style interaction between agents and the decision-maker by incorporating three key mechanisms inspired by prospect theory, including the asymmetry between benefits and costs, different subjective reference points, and non-rational probability distortion. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets establish Pro-SF as a behaviorally grounded approach to strategic classification, bridging machine learning and behavioral economics for more reliable deployment in the real world.
Abstract:Autocorrelation is a defining characteristic of time-series data, where each observation is statistically dependent on its predecessors. In the context of deep time-series forecasting, autocorrelation arises in both the input history and the label sequences, presenting two central research challenges: (1) designing neural architectures that model autocorrelation in history sequences, and (2) devising learning objectives that model autocorrelation in label sequences. Recent studies have made strides in tackling these challenges, but a systematic survey examining both aspects remains lacking. To bridge this gap, this paper provides a comprehensive review of deep time-series forecasting from the perspective of autocorrelation modeling. In contrast to existing surveys, this work makes two distinctive contributions. First, it proposes a novel taxonomy that encompasses recent literature on both model architectures and learning objectives -- whereas prior surveys neglect or inadequately discuss the latter aspect. Second, it offers a thorough analysis of the motivations, insights, and progression of the surveyed literature from a unified, autocorrelation-centric perspective, providing a holistic overview of the evolution of deep time-series forecasting. The full list of papers and resources is available at https://github.com/Master-PLC/Awesome-TSF-Papers.
Abstract:Despite the success of reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) in aligning language models, current reward modeling heavily relies on experimental feedback data collected from human annotators under controlled and costly conditions. In this work, we introduce observational reward modeling -- learning reward models with observational user feedback (e.g., clicks, copies, and upvotes) -- as a scalable and cost-effective alternative. We identify two fundamental challenges in this setting: (1) observational feedback is noisy due to annotation errors, which deviates it from true user preference; (2) observational feedback is biased by user preference, where users preferentially provide feedback on responses they feel strongly about, which creats a distribution shift between training and inference data. To address these challenges, we propose CausalRM, a causal-theoretic reward modeling framework that aims to learn unbiased reward models from observational feedback. To tackle challenge (1), CausalRM introduces a noise-aware surrogate loss term that is provably equivalent to the primal loss under noise-free conditions by explicitly modeling the annotation error generation process. To tackle challenge (2), CausalRM uses propensity scores -- the probability of a user providing feedback for a given response -- to reweight training samples, yielding a loss function that eliminates user preference bias. Extensive experiments across diverse LLM backbones and benchmark datasets validate that CausalRM effectively learns accurate reward signals from noisy and biased observational feedback and delivers substantial performance improvements on downstream RLHF tasks -- including a 49.2% gain on WildGuardMix and a 32.7% improvement on HarmBench. Code is available on our project website.
Abstract:Detecting unobserved confounders is crucial for reliable causal inference in observational studies. Existing methods require either linearity assumptions or multiple heterogeneous environments, limiting applicability to nonlinear single-environment settings. To bridge this gap, we propose Kernel Regression Confounder Detection (KRCD), a novel method for detecting unobserved confounding in nonlinear observational data under single-environment conditions. KRCD leverages reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces to model complex dependencies. By comparing standard and higherorder kernel regressions, we derive a test statistic whose significant deviation from zero indicates unobserved confounding. Theoretically, we prove two key results: First, in infinite samples, regression coefficients coincide if and only if no unobserved confounders exist. Second, finite-sample differences converge to zero-mean Gaussian distributions with tractable variance. Extensive experiments on synthetic benchmarks and the Twins dataset demonstrate that KRCD not only outperforms existing baselines but also achieves superior computational efficiency.