Algorithmic Recourse in the Face of Noisy Human Responses
  As machine learning (ML) models are increasingly being deployed in
high-stakes applications, there has been growing interest in providing recourse
to individuals adversely impacted by model predictions (e.g., an applicant
whose loan has been denied). To this end, several post hoc techniques have been
proposed in recent literature. These techniques generate recourses under the
assumption that the affected individuals will implement the prescribed
recourses exactly. However, recent studies suggest that individuals often
implement recourses in a noisy and inconsistent manner - e.g., raising their
salary by \$505 if the prescribed recourse suggested an increase of \$500.
Motivated by this, we introduce and study the problem of recourse invalidation
in the face of noisy human responses. More specifically, we theoretically and
empirically analyze the behavior of state-of-the-art algorithms, and
demonstrate that the recourses generated by these algorithms are very likely to
be invalidated if small changes are made to them. We further propose a novel
framework, EXPECTing noisy responses (EXPECT), which addresses the
aforementioned problem by explicitly minimizing the probability of recourse
invalidation in the face of noisy responses. Experimental evaluation with
multiple real world datasets demonstrates the efficacy of the proposed
framework, and supports our theoretical findings
