How fair can we go in machine learning? Assessing the boundaries of fairness in decision trees

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.12399v1
• Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 16:28:26 GMT
• Title: How fair can we go in machine learning? Assessing the boundaries of fairness in decision trees
• Authors: Ana Valdivia, Javier S\'anchez-Monedero and Jorge Casillas
• Abstract summary: We present the first methodology that allows to explore the statistical limits of bias mitigation interventions. We focus our study on decision tree classifiers since they are widely accepted in machine learning. We conclude experimentally that our method can optimize decision tree models by being fairer with a small cost of the classification error.
• Score: 0.12891210250935145
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Fair machine learning works have been focusing on the development of equitable algorithms that address discrimination of certain groups. Yet, many of these fairness-aware approaches aim to obtain a unique solution to the problem, which leads to a poor understanding of the statistical limits of bias mitigation interventions. We present the first methodology that allows to explore those limits within a multi-objective framework that seeks to optimize any measure of accuracy and fairness and provides a Pareto front with the best feasible solutions. In this work, we focus our study on decision tree classifiers since they are widely accepted in machine learning, are easy to interpret and can deal with non-numerical information naturally. We conclude experimentally that our method can optimize decision tree models by being fairer with a small cost of the classification error. We believe that our contribution will help stakeholders of sociotechnical systems to assess how far they can go being fair and accurate, thus serving in the support of enhanced decision making where machine learning is used.

Related papers

• Fair Few-shot Learning with Auxiliary Sets [53.30014767684218]
  In many machine learning (ML) tasks, only very few labeled data samples can be collected, which can lead to inferior fairness performance. In this paper, we define the fairness-aware learning task with limited training samples as the emphfair few-shot learning problem. We devise a novel framework that accumulates fairness-aware knowledge across different meta-training tasks and then generalizes the learned knowledge to meta-test tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T06:31:37Z)
• Fairness in Matching under Uncertainty [78.39459690570531]
  algorithmic two-sided marketplaces have drawn attention to the issue of fairness in such settings. We axiomatize a notion of individual fairness in the two-sided marketplace setting which respects the uncertainty in the merits. We design a linear programming framework to find fair utility-maximizing distributions over allocations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T00:30:32Z)
• Causal Fairness Analysis [68.12191782657437]
  We introduce a framework for understanding, modeling, and possibly solving issues of fairness in decision-making settings. The main insight of our approach will be to link the quantification of the disparities present on the observed data with the underlying, and often unobserved, collection of causal mechanisms. Our effort culminates in the Fairness Map, which is the first systematic attempt to organize and explain the relationship between different criteria found in the literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-23T01:06:34Z)
• Learning Optimal Fair Classification Trees: Trade-offs Between Interpretability, Fairness, and Accuracy [7.215903549622416]
  We propose a mixed integer optimization framework for learning optimal classification trees. We benchmark our method against state-of-the-art approaches for fair classification on popular datasets. Our method consistently finds decisions with almost full parity, while other methods rarely do.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-24T19:47:10Z)
• Can Active Learning Preemptively Mitigate Fairness Issues? [66.84854430781097]
  dataset bias is one of the prevailing causes of unfairness in machine learning. We study whether models trained with uncertainty-based ALs are fairer in their decisions with respect to a protected class. We also explore the interaction of algorithmic fairness methods such as gradient reversal (GRAD) and BALD.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-14T14:20:22Z)
• Coping with Mistreatment in Fair Algorithms [1.2183405753834557]
  We study the algorithmic fairness in a supervised learning setting and examine the effect of optimizing a classifier for the Equal Opportunity metric. We propose a conceptually simple method to mitigate this bias. We rigorously analyze the proposed method and evaluate it on several real world datasets demonstrating its efficacy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-22T03:26:06Z)
• Leveraging Expert Consistency to Improve Algorithmic Decision Support [62.61153549123407]
  We explore the use of historical expert decisions as a rich source of information that can be combined with observed outcomes to narrow the construct gap. We propose an influence function-based methodology to estimate expert consistency indirectly when each case in the data is assessed by a single expert. Our empirical evaluation, using simulations in a clinical setting and real-world data from the child welfare domain, indicates that the proposed approach successfully narrows the construct gap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-24T05:40:29Z)
• All of the Fairness for Edge Prediction with Optimal Transport [11.51786288978429]
  We study the problem of fairness for the task of edge prediction in graphs. We propose an embedding-agnostic repairing procedure for the adjacency matrix of an arbitrary graph with a trade-off between the group and individual fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-30T15:33:13Z)
• 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)
• Fair Meta-Learning For Few-Shot Classification [7.672769260569742]
  A machine learning algorithm trained on biased data tends to make unfair predictions. We propose a novel fair fast-adapted few-shot meta-learning approach that efficiently mitigates biases during meta-train. We empirically demonstrate that our proposed approach efficiently mitigates biases on model output and generalizes both accuracy and fairness to unseen tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-23T22:33:47Z)
• Accuracy and Fairness Trade-offs in Machine Learning: A Stochastic Multi-Objective Approach [0.0]
  In the application of machine learning to real-life decision-making systems, the prediction outcomes might discriminate against people with sensitive attributes, leading to unfairness. The commonly used strategy in fair machine learning is to include fairness as a constraint or a penalization term in the minimization of the prediction loss. In this paper, we introduce a new approach to handle fairness by formulating a multi-objective optimization problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-03T18:51:24Z)

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.