Improving Screening Processes via Calibrated Subset Selection
Lequn Wang, Thorsten Joachims, Manuel Gomez Rodriguez
Abstract
Many selection processes such as finding patients qualifying for a medical trial or retrieval pipelines in search engines consist of multiple stages, where an initial screening stage focuses the resources on shortlisting the most promising candidates. In this paper, we investigate what guarantees a screening classifier can provide, independently of whether it is constructed manually or trained. We find that current solutions do not enjoy distribution-free theoretical guarantees -- we show that, in general, even for a perfectly calibrated classifier, there always exist specific pools of candidates for which its shortlist is suboptimal. Then, we develop a distribution-free screening algorithm -- called Calibrated Subset Selection (CSS) -- that, given any classifier and some amount of calibration data, finds near-optimal shortlists of candidates that contain a desired number of qualified candidates in expectation. Moreover, we show that a variant of CSS that calibrates a given classifier multiple times across specific groups can create shortlists with provable diversity guarantees. Experiments on US Census survey data validate our theoretical results and show that the shortlists provided by our algorithm are superior to those provided by several competitive baselines.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers10
- Improving Expert Predictions with Conformal PredictionEleni Straitouri, Lequn Wang, Nastaran Okati, Manuel Gomez RodriguezICML 2023 · 56 citations
- Human-Aligned Calibration for AI-Assisted Decision MakingNina Corvelo Benz, Manuel Gomez RodriguezNeurIPS 2023 · 45 citations
- Impact of Decentralized Learning on Player Utilities in Stackelberg GamesKate Donahue, Nicole Immorlica, Meena Jagadeesan, Brendan Lucier et al.ICML 2024 · 9 citations
- Classification Under Strategic Self-SelectionGuy Horowitz, Yonatan Sommer, Moran Koren, Nir RosenfeldICML 2024 · 8 citations
- When Are Two Lists Better than One?: Benefits and Harms in Joint Decision-MakingKate Donahue, Sreenivas Gollapudi, Kostas KolliasAAAI 2024 · 8 citations
Builds on9
- Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine LearningFrances Ding, Moritz Hardt, John Miller, Ludwig SchmidtNeurIPS 2021 · 671 citations
- Off-policy Learning in Two-stage Recommender SystemsJiaqi Ma, Zhe Zhao, Xinyang Yi, Ji Yang et al.WWW 2020 · 106 citations
- Distribution-free binary classification: prediction sets, confidence intervals and calibrationChirag Gupta, Aleksandr Podkopaev, Aaditya RamdasNeurIPS 2020 · 105 citations
- Calibrating Predictions to Decisions: A Novel Approach to Multi-Class CalibrationShengjia Zhao, Michael P. Kim, Roshni Sahoo, Tengyu Ma et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 96 citations
- Decisions, Counterfactual Explanations and Strategic BehaviorStratis Tsirtsis, Manuel Gomez RodriguezNeurIPS 2020 · 75 citations
Related papers
- On the Within-Group Fairness of Screening ClassifiersNastaran Okati, Stratis Tsirtsis, Manuel Gomez RodriguezICML 2023 · 4 citations
- Discretization-free Multicalibration through Loss Minimization over Tree EnsemblesHongyi Henry Jin, Zijun Ding, Dung Daniel T. Ngo, Zhiwei Steven WuNeurIPS 2025 · 6 citations
- SURE: Robust, Explainable, and Fair Classification without Sensitive AttributesDeepayan ChakrabartiKDD 2023 · 1 citation
- What are the Desired Characteristics of Calibration Sets? Identifying Correlates on Long Form Scientific SummarizationGriffin Adams, Bichlien Nguyen, Jake Smith, Yingce Xia et al.ACL 2023 · 8 citations
- How Much is Unseen Depends Chiefly on Information About the SeenSeongmin Lee, Marcel BöhmeICLR 2025
