Machine learning is increasingly used in government programs to identify and support the most vulnerable individuals, prioritizing assistance for those at greatest risk over optimizing aggregate outcomes. This paper examines the welfare impacts of prediction in equity-driven contexts, and how they compare to other policy levers, such as expanding bureaucratic capacity. Through mathematical models and a real-world case study on long-term unemployment amongst German residents, we develop a comprehensive understanding of the relative effectiveness of prediction in surfacing the worst-off. Our findings provide clear analytical frameworks and practical, data-driven tools that empower policymakers to make principled decisions when designing these systems.

A key task in certain democratic processes is to produce a concise slate of statements that proportionally represents the full spectrum of user opinions. This task is similar to committee elections, but unlike traditional settings, the candidate set comprises all possible statements of varying lengths, and so it can only be accessed through specific queries. Combining social choice and large language models, prior work has approached this challenge through a framework of generative social choice. We extend the framework in two fundamental ways, providing theoretical guarantees even in the face of approximately optimal queries and a budget limit on the overall length of the slate. Using GPT-4o to implement queries, we showcase our approach on datasets related to city improvement measures and drug reviews, demonstrating its effectiveness in generating representative slates from unstructured user opinions.

As platforms increasingly rely on learning algorithms, collectives may form and seek ways to influence these platforms to align with their own interests. This can be achieved by coordinated submission of altered data. To evaluate the potential impact of such behavior, it is essential to understand the computations that collectives must perform to impact platforms in this way. In particular, collectives need to make a priori assessments of the effect of the collective before taking action, as they may face potential risks when modifying their data. Moreover they need to develop implementable coordination algorithms based on quantities that can be inferred from observed data. We develop a framework that provides a theoretical and algorithmic treatment of these issues and present experimental results in a product evaluation domain.

We study the design of iterative combinatorial auctions (ICAs).The main challenge in this domain is that the bundle space grows exponentially in the number of items. To address this, recent work has proposed machine learning (ML)-based preference elicitation algorithms that aim to elicit only the most critical information from bidders to maximize efficiency.However, while the SOTA ML-based algorithms elicit bidders' preferences via value queries, ICAs that are used in practice elicit information via demand queries. In this paper, we introduce a novel ML algorithm that provably makes use of the full information from both value and demand queries, and we show via experiments that combining both query types results in significantly better learning performance in practice. Building on these insights, we present MLHCA, a new ML-powered auction that uses value and demand queries. MLHCA significantly outperforms the previous SOTA, reducing efficiency loss by up to a factor 10, with up to 58% fewer queries. Thus, MLHCA achieves large efficiency improvements while also reducing bidders' cognitive load, establishing a new benchmark for both practicability and efficiency. Our code is available at https://github.com/marketdesignresearch/MLHCA.