On the Fairness of Causal Algorithmic Recourse
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.06529v5
- Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2022 15:13:07 GMT
- Title: On the Fairness of Causal Algorithmic Recourse
- Authors: Julius von K\"ugelgen, Amir-Hossein Karimi, Umang Bhatt, Isabel
Valera, Adrian Weller, Bernhard Sch\"olkopf
- Abstract summary: We propose two new fairness criteria at the group and individual level.
We show that fairness of recourse is complementary to fairness of prediction.
We discuss whether fairness violations in the data generating process revealed by our criteria may be better addressed by societal interventions.
- Score: 36.519629650529666
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Algorithmic fairness is typically studied from the perspective of
predictions. Instead, here we investigate fairness from the perspective of
recourse actions suggested to individuals to remedy an unfavourable
classification. We propose two new fairness criteria at the group and
individual level, which -- unlike prior work on equalising the average
group-wise distance from the decision boundary -- explicitly account for causal
relationships between features, thereby capturing downstream effects of
recourse actions performed in the physical world. We explore how our criteria
relate to others, such as counterfactual fairness, and show that fairness of
recourse is complementary to fairness of prediction. We study theoretically and
empirically how to enforce fair causal recourse by altering the classifier and
perform a case study on the Adult dataset. Finally, we discuss whether fairness
violations in the data generating process revealed by our criteria may be
better addressed by societal interventions as opposed to constraints on the
classifier.
Related papers
- Finite-Sample and Distribution-Free Fair Classification: Optimal Trade-off Between Excess Risk and Fairness, and the Cost of Group-Blindness [14.421493372559762]
We quantify the impact of enforcing algorithmic fairness and group-blindness in binary classification under group fairness constraints.
We propose a unified framework for fair classification that provides distribution-free and finite-sample fairness guarantees with controlled excess risk.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-21T20:04:17Z) - Fairness-Accuracy Trade-Offs: A Causal Perspective [58.06306331390586]
We analyze the tension between fairness and accuracy from a causal lens for the first time.
We show that enforcing a causal constraint often reduces the disparity between demographic groups.
We introduce a new neural approach for causally-constrained fair learning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-24T11:19:52Z) - Fair Clustering: A Causal Perspective [5.885238773559016]
We show that optimising for non-causal fairness notions can paradoxically induce direct discriminatory effects from a causal standpoint.
We present a clustering approach that incorporates causal fairness metrics to provide a more nuanced approach to fairness in unsupervised learning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-14T15:58:03Z) - DualFair: Fair Representation Learning at Both Group and Individual
Levels via Contrastive Self-supervision [73.80009454050858]
This work presents a self-supervised model, called DualFair, that can debias sensitive attributes like gender and race from learned representations.
Our model jointly optimize for two fairness criteria - group fairness and counterfactual fairness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-15T07:13:54Z) - Arbitrariness and Social Prediction: The Confounding Role of Variance in
Fair Classification [31.392067805022414]
Variance in predictions across different trained models is a significant, under-explored source of error in fair binary classification.
In practice, the variance on some data examples is so large that decisions can be effectively arbitrary.
We develop an ensembling algorithm that abstains from classification when a prediction would be arbitrary.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-27T06:52:04Z) - Fairness and robustness in anti-causal prediction [73.693135253335]
Robustness to distribution shift and fairness have independently emerged as two important desiderata required of machine learning models.
While these two desiderata seem related, the connection between them is often unclear in practice.
By taking this perspective, we draw explicit connections between a common fairness criterion - separation - and a common notion of robustness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-09-20T02:41:17Z) - Conditional Supervised Contrastive Learning for Fair Text Classification [59.813422435604025]
We study learning fair representations that satisfy a notion of fairness known as equalized odds for text classification via contrastive learning.
Specifically, we first theoretically analyze the connections between learning representations with a fairness constraint and conditional supervised contrastive objectives.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-23T17:38:30Z) - Measuring Fairness of Text Classifiers via Prediction Sensitivity [63.56554964580627]
ACCUMULATED PREDICTION SENSITIVITY measures fairness in machine learning models based on the model's prediction sensitivity to perturbations in input features.
We show that the metric can be theoretically linked with a specific notion of group fairness (statistical parity) and individual fairness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-03-16T15:00:33Z) - Unfairness Despite Awareness: Group-Fair Classification with Strategic
Agents [37.31138342300617]
We show that strategic agents may possess both the ability and the incentive to manipulate an observed feature vector in order to attain a more favorable outcome.
We further demonstrate that both the increased selectiveness of the fair classifier, and consequently the loss of fairness, arises when performing fair learning on domains in which the advantaged group is overrepresented.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-12-06T02:42:43Z) - Principal Fairness for Human and Algorithmic Decision-Making [1.2691047660244335]
We introduce a new notion of fairness, called principal fairness, for human and algorithmic decision-making.
Unlike the existing statistical definitions of fairness, principal fairness explicitly accounts for the fact that individuals can be impacted by the decision.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-21T00:24:54Z)
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.