Quantifying Social Biases in NLP: A Generalization and Empirical Comparison of Extrinsic Fairness Metrics

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.14574v1
• Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 11:02:33 GMT
• Title: Quantifying Social Biases in NLP: A Generalization and Empirical Comparison of Extrinsic Fairness Metrics
• Abstract summary: Measuring bias is key for better understanding and addressing unfairness in NLP/ML models. We shed more light on the differences and similarities between the fairness metrics used in NLP.
• Score: 5.248359551210087
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Measuring bias is key for better understanding and addressing unfairness in NLP/ML models. This is often done via fairness metrics which quantify the differences in a model's behaviour across a range of demographic groups. In this work, we shed more light on the differences and similarities between the fairness metrics used in NLP. First, we unify a broad range of existing metrics under three generalized fairness metrics, revealing the connections between them. Next, we carry out an extensive empirical comparison of existing metrics and demonstrate that the observed differences in bias measurement can be systematically explained via differences in parameter choices for our generalized metrics.

Related papers

• MESD: Detecting and Mitigating Procedural Bias in Intersectional Groups [0.0]
  This research addresses an important gap by examining explainability with respect to fairness across multiple protected categories.<n> Experimental results across multiple datasets show that UEF effectively balances objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T15:42:31Z)
• Comprehensive Equity Index (CEI): Definition and Application to Bias Evaluation in Biometrics [47.762333925222926]
  We present a novel metric to quantify biased behaviors of machine learning models. We focus on and apply it to the operational evaluation of face recognition systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-03T14:19:38Z)
• Towards Multiple References Era -- Addressing Data Leakage and Limited Reference Diversity in NLG Evaluation [55.92852268168816]
  N-gram matching-based evaluation metrics, such as BLEU and chrF, are widely utilized across a range of natural language generation (NLG) tasks. Recent studies have revealed a weak correlation between these matching-based metrics and human evaluations. We propose to utilize textitmultiple references to enhance the consistency between these metrics and human evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-06T14:49:26Z)
• Investigating the Effects of Fairness Interventions Using Pointwise Representational Similarity [12.879768345296718]
  We introduce Pointwise Normalized Kernel Alignment (PNKA), a pointwise representational similarity measure.<n>PNKA reveals previously unknown insights by measuring how debiasing measures affect the intermediate representations of individuals.<n>We show that by evaluating representations using PNKA, we can reliably predict the behavior of ML models trained on these representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T09:40:08Z)
• Enriching Disentanglement: From Logical Definitions to Quantitative Metrics [59.12308034729482]
  Disentangling the explanatory factors in complex data is a promising approach for data-efficient representation learning. We establish relationships between logical definitions and quantitative metrics to derive theoretically grounded disentanglement metrics. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed metrics by isolating different aspects of disentangled representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T08:22:23Z)
• Fair Enough: Standardizing Evaluation and Model Selection for Fairness Research in NLP [64.45845091719002]
  Modern NLP systems exhibit a range of biases, which a growing literature on model debiasing attempts to correct. This paper seeks to clarify the current situation and plot a course for meaningful progress in fair learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-11T14:54:00Z)
• Analysis and Comparison of Classification Metrics [12.092755413404245]
  Metrics for measuring the quality of system scores include the area under the ROC curve, equal error rate, cross-entropy, Brier score, and Bayes EC or Bayes risk. We show how to use these metrics to compute a system's calibration loss and compare this metric with the widely-used expected calibration error (ECE)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-12T16:06:10Z)
• 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)
• Evaluating Metrics for Bias in Word Embeddings [44.14639209617701]
  We formalize a bias definition based on the ideas from previous works and derive conditions for bias metrics. We propose a new metric, SAME, to address the shortcomings of existing metrics and mathematically prove that SAME behaves appropriately.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-15T16:07:15Z)
• Measure Twice, Cut Once: Quantifying Bias and Fairness in Deep Neural Networks [7.763173131630868]
  We propose two metrics to quantitatively evaluate the class-wise bias of two models in comparison to one another. By evaluating the performance of these new metrics and by demonstrating their practical application, we show that they can be used to measure fairness as well as bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-08T22:35:34Z)
• On the Relation between Quality-Diversity Evaluation and Distribution-Fitting Goal in Text Generation [86.11292297348622]
  We show that a linear combination of quality and diversity constitutes a divergence metric between the generated distribution and the real distribution. We propose CR/NRR as a substitute for quality/diversity metric pair.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-03T04:06:59Z)
• Addressing multiple metrics of group fairness in data-driven decision making [2.750586731051391]
  FAT-ML literature proposes a varied set of group fairness metrics to measure discrimination against socio-demographic groups. We observe that several of these metrics cluster together in two or three main clusters for the same groups and machine learning methods. We propose a robust way to visualize multidimensional fairness in two dimensions through a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of the group fairness metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-10T15:13:05Z)

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.