Attributing Fair Decisions with Attention Interventions
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2109.03952v1
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 22:28:44 GMT
- Title: Attributing Fair Decisions with Attention Interventions
- Authors: Ninareh Mehrabi, Umang Gupta, Fred Morstatter, Greg Ver Steeg, Aram
Galstyan
- Abstract summary: We design an attention-based model that can be leveraged as an attribution framework.
It can identify features responsible for both performance and fairness of the model through attention interventions and attention weight manipulation.
We then design a post-processing bias mitigation strategy and compare it with a suite of baselines.
- Score: 28.968122909973975
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: The widespread use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in consequential domains,
such as healthcare and parole decision-making systems, has drawn intense
scrutiny on the fairness of these methods. However, ensuring fairness is often
insufficient as the rationale for a contentious decision needs to be audited,
understood, and defended. We propose that the attention mechanism can be used
to ensure fair outcomes while simultaneously providing feature attributions to
account for how a decision was made. Toward this goal, we design an
attention-based model that can be leveraged as an attribution framework. It can
identify features responsible for both performance and fairness of the model
through attention interventions and attention weight manipulation. Using this
attribution framework, we then design a post-processing bias mitigation
strategy and compare it with a suite of baselines. We demonstrate the
versatility of our approach by conducting experiments on two distinct data
types, tabular and textual.
Related papers
- Striking a Balance in Fairness for Dynamic Systems Through Reinforcement
Learning [6.814499629376316]
We study fairness in dynamic systems where sequential decisions are made.
We propose an algorithmic framework to integrate various fairness considerations with reinforcement learning.
Three case studies show that our method can strike a balance between traditional fairness notions, long-term fairness, and utility.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-12T01:29:26Z) - Make Your Decision Convincing! A Unified Two-Stage Framework:
Self-Attribution and Decision-Making [24.906886146275127]
We propose a unified two-stage framework known as Self-Attribution and Decision-Making (SADM)
We demonstrate that our framework not only establishes a more reliable link between the generated rationale and model decision but also achieves competitive results in task performance and the quality of rationale.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-20T15:59:57Z) - Fairness Explainability using Optimal Transport with Applications in
Image Classification [0.46040036610482665]
We propose a comprehensive approach to uncover the causes of discrimination in Machine Learning applications.
We leverage Wasserstein barycenters to achieve fair predictions and introduce an extension to pinpoint bias-associated regions.
This allows us to derive a cohesive system which uses the enforced fairness to measure each features influence emphon the bias.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-22T00:10:23Z) - 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) - 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) - Exploring the Trade-off between Plausibility, Change Intensity and
Adversarial Power in Counterfactual Explanations using Multi-objective
Optimization [73.89239820192894]
We argue that automated counterfactual generation should regard several aspects of the produced adversarial instances.
We present a novel framework for the generation of counterfactual examples.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-20T15:02:53Z) - 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) - Information Theoretic Measures for Fairness-aware Feature Selection [27.06618125828978]
We develop a framework for fairness-aware feature selection, based on information theoretic measures for the accuracy and discriminatory impacts of features.
Specifically, our goal is to design a fairness utility score for each feature which quantifies how this feature influences accurate as well as nondiscriminatory decisions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-01T20:11:54Z) - 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) - 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)
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.