Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

A survey of algorithmic recourse: definitions, formulations, solutions, and prospects

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2010.04050 v2 pith:4HHES3BZ submitted 2020-10-08 cs.LG cs.AIstat.ML

classification cs.LGcs.AIstat.ML
keywords recoursealgorithmicdecision-makingdefinitionsfairnessformulationsindividualsprivacy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Machine learning is increasingly used to inform decision-making in sensitive situations where decisions have consequential effects on individuals' lives. In these settings, in addition to requiring models to be accurate and robust, socially relevant values such as fairness, privacy, accountability, and explainability play an important role for the adoption and impact of said technologies. In this work, we focus on algorithmic recourse, which is concerned with providing explanations and recommendations to individuals who are unfavourably treated by automated decision-making systems. We first perform an extensive literature review, and align the efforts of many authors by presenting unified definitions, formulations, and solutions to recourse. Then, we provide an overview of the prospective research directions towards which the community may engage, challenging existing assumptions and making explicit connections to other ethical challenges such as security, privacy, and fairness.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Survey of Explainable Reinforcement Learning: Targets, Methods and Needs

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey of 250+ explainable-reinforcement-learning papers proposes a What/How taxonomy and reports that sequence-level explanations are rare (11 works) compared with policy-level (175) and action-level (89) ones.

  2. Steering Robots with Inference-Time Interactions

    cs.RO 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Frozen imitation policies can be steered at inference time via user interactions, with a diffusion-sampling method and a constraint-enforcing framework that provides formal task guarantees.

  3. Pareto Optimal Algorithmic Recourse in Multi-cost Function

    cs.LG 2025-02 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A Bellman-Ford-style dynamic program over an actionability graph returns all Pareto-optimal recourse paths for multiple non-differentiable metric costs, with an epsilon-net sampling scheme proposed for scalability.

Pith tools