We consider the problem of learning an optimal prescriptive tree (i.e., a personalized treatment assignment policy in the form of a binary tree) of moderate depth, from observational data. This problem arises in numerous socially important domains such as public health and personalized medicine, where interpretable and data-driven interventions are sought based on data gathered in deployment, through passive collection of data, rather than from randomized trials. We propose a method for learning optimal prescriptive trees using mixed-integer optimization (MIO) technology. We show that under mild conditions our method is asymptotically exact in the sense that it converges to an optimal out-of-sample treatment assignment policy as the number of historical data samples tends to infinity. This sets us apart from existing literature on the topic which either requires data to be randomized or imposes stringent assumptions on the trees. Based on extensive computational experiments on both synthetic and real data, we demonstrate that our asymptotic guarantees translate to significant out-of-sample performance improvements even in finite samples.

We study critical systems that allocate scarce resources to satisfy basic needs, such as homeless services that provide housing. These systems often support communities disproportionately affected by systemic racial, gender, or other injustices, so it is crucial to design these systems with fairness considerations in mind. To address this problem, we propose a framework for evaluating fairness in contextual resource allocation systems that is inspired by fairness metrics in machine learning. This framework can be applied to evaluate the fairness properties of a historical policy, as well as to impose constraints in the design of new (counterfactual) allocation policies. Our work culminates with a set of incompatibility results that investigate the interplay between the different fairness metrics we propose. Notably, we demonstrate that: 1) fairness in allocation and fairness in outcomes are usually incompatible; 2) policies that prioritize based on a vulnerability score will usually result in unequal outcomes across groups, even if the score is perfectly calibrated; 3) policies using contextual information beyond what is needed to characterize baseline risk and treatment effects can be fairer in their outcomes than those using just baseline risk and treatment effects; and 4) policies using group status in addition to baseline risk and treatment effects are as fair as possible given all available information. Our framework can help guide the discussion among stakeholders in deciding which fairness metrics to impose when allocating scarce resources.

The increasing use of machine learning in high-stakes domains -where people's livelihoods are impacted -creates an urgent need for interpretable and fair algorithms. In these settings it is also critical for such algorithms to be accurate. With these needs in mind, we propose a mixed integer optimization (MIO) framework for learning optimal classification trees of fixed depth that can be conveniently augmented with arbitrary domain specific fairness constraints. We benchmark our method against the state-of-the-art approach for building fair trees on popular datasets; given a fixed discrimination threshold, our approach improves out-of-sample (OOS) accuracy by 2.3 percentage points on average and obtains a higher OOS accuracy on 88.9% of the experiments. We also incorporate various algorithmic fairness notions into our method, showcasing its versatile modeling power that allows decision makers to fine-tune the trade-off between accuracy and fairness.

No abstract