Recovering from Biased Data: Can Fairness Constraints Improve Accuracy?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1912.01094v2
• Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:33:28 GMT
• Title: Recovering from Biased Data: Can Fairness Constraints Improve Accuracy?
• Authors: Avrim Blum, Kevin Stangl,
• Abstract summary: Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) may produce a classifier that not only is biased but also has suboptimal accuracy on the true data distribution. We examine the ability of fairness-constrained ERM to correct this problem. We also consider other recovery methods including reweighting the training data, Equalized Odds, and Demographic Parity.
• Score: 11.435833538081557
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Multiple fairness constraints have been proposed in the literature, motivated by a range of concerns about how demographic groups might be treated unfairly by machine learning classifiers. In this work we consider a different motivation; learning from biased training data. We posit several ways in which training data may be biased, including having a more noisy or negatively biased labeling process on members of a disadvantaged group, or a decreased prevalence of positive or negative examples from the disadvantaged group, or both. Given such biased training data, Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) may produce a classifier that not only is biased but also has suboptimal accuracy on the true data distribution. We examine the ability of fairness-constrained ERM to correct this problem. In particular, we find that the Equal Opportunity fairness constraint (Hardt, Price, and Srebro 2016) combined with ERM will provably recover the Bayes Optimal Classifier under a range of bias models. We also consider other recovery methods including reweighting the training data, Equalized Odds, and Demographic Parity. These theoretical results provide additional motivation for considering fairness interventions even if an actor cares primarily about accuracy.

Related papers

• Fairness Without Harm: An Influence-Guided Active Sampling Approach [32.173195437797766]
  We aim to train models that mitigate group fairness disparity without causing harm to model accuracy. The current data acquisition methods, such as fair active learning approaches, typically require annotating sensitive attributes. We propose a tractable active data sampling algorithm that does not rely on training group annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T07:57:38Z)
• How Far Can Fairness Constraints Help Recover From Biased Data? [9.430687114814997]
  A general belief in fair classification is that fairness constraints incur a trade-off with accuracy, which biased data may worsen. Contrary to this belief, Blum & Stangl show that fair classification with equal opportunity constraints even on extremely biased data can recover optimally accurate and fair classifiers on the original data distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-16T09:49:31Z)
• On Comparing Fair Classifiers under Data Bias [42.43344286660331]
  We study the effect of varying data biases on the accuracy and fairness of fair classifiers. Our experiments show how to integrate a measure of data bias risk in the existing fairness dashboards for real-world deployments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-12T13:04:46Z)
• A Differentiable Distance Approximation for Fairer Image Classification [31.471917430653626]
  We propose a differentiable approximation of the variance of demographics, a metric that can be used to measure the bias, or unfairness, in an AI model. Our approximation can be optimised alongside the regular training objective which eliminates the need for any extra models during training. We demonstrate that our approach improves the fairness of AI models in varied task and dataset scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-09T23:02:18Z)
• D-BIAS: A Causality-Based Human-in-the-Loop System for Tackling Algorithmic Bias [57.87117733071416]
  We propose D-BIAS, a visual interactive tool that embodies human-in-the-loop AI approach for auditing and mitigating social biases. A user can detect the presence of bias against a group by identifying unfair causal relationships in the causal network. For each interaction, say weakening/deleting a biased causal edge, the system uses a novel method to simulate a new (debiased) dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-10T03:41:48Z)
• Optimising Equal Opportunity Fairness in Model Training [60.0947291284978]
  Existing debiasing methods, such as adversarial training and removing protected information from representations, have been shown to reduce bias. We propose two novel training objectives which directly optimise for the widely-used criterion of it equal opportunity, and show that they are effective in reducing bias while maintaining high performance over two classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-05T01:57:58Z)
• Towards Equal Opportunity Fairness through Adversarial Learning [64.45845091719002]
  Adversarial training is a common approach for bias mitigation in natural language processing. We propose an augmented discriminator for adversarial training, which takes the target class as input to create richer features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-12T02:22:58Z)
• Fair Group-Shared Representations with Normalizing Flows [68.29997072804537]
  We develop a fair representation learning algorithm which is able to map individuals belonging to different groups in a single group. We show experimentally that our methodology is competitive with other fair representation learning algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-17T10:49:49Z)
• Bias-Tolerant Fair Classification [20.973916494320246]
  label bias and selection bias are two reasons in data that will hinder the fairness of machine-learning outcomes. We propose a Bias-TolerantFAirRegularizedLoss (B-FARL) which tries to regain the benefits using data affected by label bias and selection bias. B-FARL takes the biased data as input, calls a model that approximates the one trained with fair but latent data, and thus prevents discrimination without constraints required.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-07T13:31:38Z)
• Fairness in Semi-supervised Learning: Unlabeled Data Help to Reduce Discrimination [53.3082498402884]
  A growing specter in the rise of machine learning is whether the decisions made by machine learning models are fair. We present a framework of fair semi-supervised learning in the pre-processing phase, including pseudo labeling to predict labels for unlabeled data. A theoretical decomposition analysis of bias, variance and noise highlights the different sources of discrimination and the impact they have on fairness in semi-supervised learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-25T05:48:56Z)
• Fairness Constraints in Semi-supervised Learning [56.48626493765908]
  We develop a framework for fair semi-supervised learning, which is formulated as an optimization problem. We theoretically analyze the source of discrimination in semi-supervised learning via bias, variance and noise decomposition. Our method is able to achieve fair semi-supervised learning, and reach a better trade-off between accuracy and fairness than fair supervised learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-14T04:25:59Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.