IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2404.10111.html

From Predictive Algorithms to Automatic Generation of Anomalies

Author

Listed:
  • Sendhil Mullainathan
  • Ashesh Rambachan

Abstract

How can we extract theoretical insights from machine learning algorithms? We take a familiar lesson: researchers often turn their intuitions into theoretical insights by constructing "anomalies" -- specific examples highlighting hypothesized flaws in a theory, such as the Allais paradox and the Kahneman-Tversky choice experiments for expected utility. We develop procedures that replace researchers' intuitions with predictive algorithms: given a predictive algorithm and a theory, our procedures automatically generate anomalies for that theory. We illustrate our procedures with a concrete application: generating anomalies for expected utility theory. Based on a neural network that accurately predicts lottery choices, our procedures recover known anomalies for expected utility theory and discover new ones absent from existing work. In incentivized experiments, subjects violate expected utility theory on these algorithmically generated anomalies at rates similar to the Allais paradox and common ratio effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Sendhil Mullainathan & Ashesh Rambachan, 2024. "From Predictive Algorithms to Automatic Generation of Anomalies," Papers 2404.10111, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2025.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2404.10111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.10111
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Enke & Cassidy Shubatt, 2023. "Quantifying Lottery Choice Complexity," CESifo Working Paper Series 10644, CESifo.
    2. Tetsuya Kaji & Elena Manresa & Guillaume Pouliot, 2023. "An Adversarial Approach to Structural Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(6), pages 2041-2063, November.
    3. Wright, James R. & Leyton-Brown, Kevin, 2017. "Predicting human behavior in unrepeated, simultaneous-move games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 16-37.
    4. Edward L. Glaeser & Scott Duke Kominers & Michael Luca & Nikhil Naik, 2018. "Big Data And Big Cities: The Promises And Limitations Of Improved Measures Of Urban Life," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 114-137, January.
    5. Belloni, Alexandre & Chernozhukov, Victor & Chetverikov, Denis & Kato, Kengo, 2015. "Some new asymptotic theory for least squares series: Pointwise and uniform results," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 345-366.
    6. Victor Chernozhukov & Mert Demirer & Esther Duflo & Iván Fernández-Val, 2018. "Generic Machine Learning Inference on Heterogeneous Treatment Effects in Randomized Experiments, with an Application to Immunization in India," NBER Working Papers 24678, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    8. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    9. Chen, Xiaohong & Christensen, Timothy M., 2015. "Optimal uniform convergence rates and asymptotic normality for series estimators under weak dependence and weak conditions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(2), pages 447-465.
    10. Tversky, Amos & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Anomalies: Preference Reversals," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 201-211, Spring.
    11. Peysakhovich, Alexander & Naecker, Jeffrey, 2017. "Using methods from machine learning to evaluate behavioral models of choice under risk and ambiguity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 373-384.
    12. Graham Loomes, 2005. "Modelling the Stochastic Component of Behaviour in Experiments: Some Issues for the Interpretation of Data," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(4), pages 301-323, December.
    13. George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 1992. "Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 573-597.
    14. Cerreia-Vioglio, Simone & Dillenberger, David & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2020. "An explicit representation for disappointment aversion and other betweenness preferences," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(4), November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cheaheon Lim & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2026. "Axioms and Anomalies with Finite Data," Papers 2606.15740, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2026.
    2. Annie Liang, 2025. "Using Machine Learning to Generate, Clarify, and Improve Economic Models," Papers 2508.19136, arXiv.org.
    3. Ajay Agrawal & John McHale & Alexander Oettl, 2025. "Comment on "Science in the Age of Algorithms"," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Transformative AI, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Benjamin S. Manning & John J. Horton, 2025. "General Social Agents," Papers 2508.17407, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    5. Ajay K. Agrawal & John McHale & Alexander Oettl, 2026. "AI in Science," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Science: Taking Stock and Looking Ahead, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Uri Gneezy & Yoram Halevy & Brian Hall & Theo Offerman & Jeroen van de Ven, 2024. "How Real is Hypothetical? A High-Stakes Test of the Allais Paradox," Working Papers tecipa-783, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    2. J-J Huang, 2009. "Revised behavioural models for riskless consumer choice," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(9), pages 1237-1243, September.
    3. Zhihua Li & Songfa Zhong, 2023. "Reference Dependence in Intertemporal Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 475-490, January.
    4. Selda (Ying Fang) Kao & K. Vela Velupillai, 2011. "Behavioural Economics: Classical and Modern," ASSRU Discussion Papers 1126, ASSRU - Algorithmic Social Science Research Unit.
    5. Shenhao Wang & Baichuan Mo & Jinhua Zhao, 2020. "Theory-based residual neural networks: A synergy of discrete choice models and deep neural networks," Papers 2010.11644, arXiv.org.
    6. Cassidy Shubatt & Jeffrey Yang, 2024. "Tradeoffs and Comparison Complexity," Papers 2401.17578, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    7. Floris Heukelom, 2007. "Who are the Behavioral Economists and what do they say?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-020/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    8. Carl-Friedrich Elmer, 2010. "CO2-Emissionsstandards für Personenkraftwagen als Instrument der Klimapolitik im Verkehrssektor: Rationalität, Gestaltung und Wechselwirkung mit dem Emissionshandel," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 79(2), pages 160-178.
    9. Avner Seror, 2026. "A Random Rule Model," Papers 2603.04105, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
    10. Jih-Jeng Huang & Masahiro Inuiguchi, 2015. "Diminishing Utility Decision Model for Weighting Criteria," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1263-1284, November.
    11. Satakhun Kosavinta & Donyaprueth Krairit & Do Ba Khang, 2017. "Decision making in the pre-development stage of residential development," Journal of Property Investment & Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(2), pages 160-183, March.
    12. Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Jeroen Bergh, 2011. "Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 263-304, June.
    13. Wang, Shenhao & Mo, Baichuan & Zhao, Jinhua, 2021. "Theory-based residual neural networks: A synergy of discrete choice models and deep neural networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 333-358.
    14. Neil Stewart & Stian Reimers & Adam J. L. Harris, 2015. "On the Origin of Utility, Weighting, and Discounting Functions: How They Get Their Shapes and How to Change Their Shapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 687-705, March.
    15. Makoto Kuroki & Shusaku Sasaki, 2023. "Nudging public budget officers: A field‐based survey experiment," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 3-20, September.
    16. Stracca, Livio, 2004. "Behavioral finance and asset prices: Where do we stand?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 373-405, June.
    17. Li, Jia & Liao, Zhipeng & Zhou, Wenyu, 2025. "A general test for functional inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    18. Karle, Heiko & Schumacher, Heiner & Vølund, Rune, 2023. "Consumer loss aversion and scale-dependent psychological switching costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 214-237.
    19. W. J. Wouter Botzen & Louison D. Thepaut & Sanchayan Banerjee, 2025. "Kahneman’s Insights for Climate Risks: Lessons from Bounded Rationality, Heuristics and Biases," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 88(10), pages 2663-2688, October.
    20. Lucy F. Ackert & Bryan K. Church & Richard Deaves, 2002. "Bubbles in experimental asset markets: Irrational exuberance no more," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2002-24, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General
    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2404.10111. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.