How Do Fair Decisions Fare in Long-term Qualification?
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.11300v1
- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 20:27:48 GMT
- Title: How Do Fair Decisions Fare in Long-term Qualification?
- Authors: Xueru Zhang, Ruibo Tu, Yang Liu, Mingyan Liu, Hedvig Kjellstr\"om, Kun
Zhang, Cheng Zhang
- Abstract summary: We study the dynamics of population qualification and algorithmic decisions under a partially observed Markov decision problem setting.
By characterizing the equilibrium of such dynamics, we analyze the long-term impact of static fairness constraints on the equality and improvement of group well-being.
- Score: 28.069400272075185
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Although many fairness criteria have been proposed for decision making, their
long-term impact on the well-being of a population remains unclear. In this
work, we study the dynamics of population qualification and algorithmic
decisions under a partially observed Markov decision problem setting. By
characterizing the equilibrium of such dynamics, we analyze the long-term
impact of static fairness constraints on the equality and improvement of group
well-being. Our results show that static fairness constraints can either
promote equality or exacerbate disparity depending on the driving factor of
qualification transitions and the effect of sensitive attributes on feature
distributions. We also consider possible interventions that can effectively
improve group qualification or promote equality of group qualification. Our
theoretical results and experiments on static real-world datasets with
simulated dynamics show that our framework can be used to facilitate social
science studies.
Related papers
- Structural Interventions and the Dynamics of Inequality [0.0]
We show that technical solutions must be paired with external, context-aware interventions to enact social change.
This research highlights the ways that structural inequality can be perpetuated by seemingly unbiased decision mechanisms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-03T13:44:38Z) - 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) - Understanding Instance-Level Impact of Fairness Constraints [12.866655972682254]
We study the influence of training examples when fairness constraints are imposed.
We find that training on a subset of weighty data examples leads to lower fairness violations with a trade-off of accuracy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-30T17:31:33Z) - Measuring Fairness Under Unawareness of Sensitive Attributes: A
Quantification-Based Approach [131.20444904674494]
We tackle the problem of measuring group fairness under unawareness of sensitive attributes.
We show that quantification approaches are particularly suited to tackle the fairness-under-unawareness problem.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-09-17T13:45:46Z) - Impact Remediation: Optimal Interventions to Reduce Inequality [10.806517393212491]
We develop a novel algorithmic framework for tackling pre-existing real-world disparities.
The purpose of our framework is to measure real-world disparities and discover optimal intervention policies.
In contrast to most work on optimal policy learning, we explore disparity reduction itself as an objective.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-07-01T16:35:12Z) - Addressing Fairness, Bias and Class Imbalance in Machine Learning: the
FBI-loss [11.291571222801027]
We propose a unified loss correction to address issues related to Fairness, Biases and Imbalances (FBI-loss)
The correction capabilities of the proposed approach are assessed on three real-world benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-13T15:01:14Z) - Counterfactual Representation Learning with Balancing Weights [74.67296491574318]
Key to causal inference with observational data is achieving balance in predictive features associated with each treatment type.
Recent literature has explored representation learning to achieve this goal.
We develop an algorithm for flexible, scalable and accurate estimation of causal effects.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-23T19:06:03Z) - Beyond Individual and Group Fairness [90.4666341812857]
We present a new data-driven model of fairness that is guided by the unfairness complaints received by the system.
Our model supports multiple fairness criteria and takes into account their potential incompatibilities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-08-21T14:14:44Z) - Causal Feature Selection for Algorithmic Fairness [61.767399505764736]
We consider fairness in the integration component of data management.
We propose an approach to identify a sub-collection of features that ensure the fairness of the dataset.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-10T20:20:10Z)
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.