Fair Sequential Selection Using Supervised Learning Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2110.13986v1
• Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 19:45:26 GMT
• Title: Fair Sequential Selection Using Supervised Learning Models
• Authors: Mohammad Mahdi Khalili, Xueru Zhang, Mahed Abroshan
• Abstract summary: We consider a selection problem where sequentially arrived applicants apply for a limited number of positions/jobs. We show that even with a pre-trained model that satisfies the common fairness notions, the selection outcomes may still be biased against certain demographic groups. We introduce a new fairness notion, Equal Selection (ES),'' suitable for sequential selection problems and propose a post-processing approach to satisfy the ES fairness notion.
• Score: 11.577534539649374
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We consider a selection problem where sequentially arrived applicants apply for a limited number of positions/jobs. At each time step, a decision maker accepts or rejects the given applicant using a pre-trained supervised learning model until all the vacant positions are filled. In this paper, we discuss whether the fairness notions (e.g., equal opportunity, statistical parity, etc.) that are commonly used in classification problems are suitable for the sequential selection problems. In particular, we show that even with a pre-trained model that satisfies the common fairness notions, the selection outcomes may still be biased against certain demographic groups. This observation implies that the fairness notions used in classification problems are not suitable for a selection problem where the applicants compete for a limited number of positions. We introduce a new fairness notion, ``Equal Selection (ES),'' suitable for sequential selection problems and propose a post-processing approach to satisfy the ES fairness notion. We also consider a setting where the applicants have privacy concerns, and the decision maker only has access to the noisy version of sensitive attributes. In this setting, we can show that the perfect ES fairness can still be attained under certain conditions.

Related papers

• Differentiating Choices via Commonality for Multiple-Choice Question Answering [54.04315943420376]
  Multiple-choice question answering can provide valuable clues for choosing the right answer. Existing models often rank each choice separately, overlooking the context provided by other choices. We propose a novel model by differentiating choices through identifying and eliminating their commonality, called DCQA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T12:05:21Z)
• Learning Fair Policies for Multi-stage Selection Problems from Observational Data [4.282745020665833]
  We consider the problem of learning fair policies for multi-stage selection problems from observational data. This problem arises in several high-stakes domains such as company hiring, loan approval, or bail decisions where outcomes are only observed for those selected. We propose a multi-stage framework that can be augmented with various fairness constraints, such as demographic parity or equal opportunity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-20T16:33:15Z)
• Evaluating the Fairness of Discriminative Foundation Models in Computer Vision [51.176061115977774]
  We propose a novel taxonomy for bias evaluation of discriminative foundation models, such as Contrastive Language-Pretraining (CLIP) We then systematically evaluate existing methods for mitigating bias in these models with respect to our taxonomy. Specifically, we evaluate OpenAI's CLIP and OpenCLIP models for key applications, such as zero-shot classification, image retrieval and image captioning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T10:32:39Z)
• 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)
• In Search of Insights, Not Magic Bullets: Towards Demystification of the Model Selection Dilemma in Heterogeneous Treatment Effect Estimation [92.51773744318119]
  This paper empirically investigates the strengths and weaknesses of different model selection criteria. We highlight that there is a complex interplay between selection strategies, candidate estimators and the data used for comparing them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T16:55:37Z)
• Bounding Counterfactuals under Selection Bias [60.55840896782637]
  We propose a first algorithm to address both identifiable and unidentifiable queries. We prove that, in spite of the missingness induced by the selection bias, the likelihood of the available data is unimodal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-26T10:33:10Z)
• On Fair Selection in the Presence of Implicit and Differential Variance [22.897402186120434]
  We study a model where the decision maker receives a noisy estimate of each candidate's quality, whose variance depends on the candidate's group. We show that both baseline decision makers yield discrimination, although in opposite directions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-10T16:04:13Z)
• Fair and Useful Cohort Selection [12.319543784920304]
  Dwork and Ilvento introduce an archetypal problem called fair-cohort-selection problem. A single fair classifier is composed with itself to select a group of candidates of a given size. We give optimal (or approximately optimal)-time algorithms for this problem in both an offline setting and an online setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-04T14:06:08Z)
• Intersectional Affirmative Action Policies for Top-k Candidates Selection [3.4961413413444817]
  We study the problem of selecting the top-k candidates from a pool of applicants, where each candidate is associated with a score indicating his/her aptitude. We consider a situation in which some groups of candidates experience historical and present disadvantage that makes their chances of being accepted much lower than other groups. We propose two algorithms to solve this problem, analyze them, and evaluate them experimentally using a dataset of university application scores and admissions to bachelor degrees in an OECD country.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-29T12:27:18Z)
• On Fair Selection in the Presence of Implicit Variance [17.517529275692322]
  We argue that even in the absence of implicit bias, the estimates of candidates' quality from different groups may differ in another fundamental way, namely, in their variance. We propose a simple model in which candidates have a true latent quality that is drawn from a group-independent normal distribution. We show that the demographic parity mechanism always increases the selection utility, while any $gamma$-rule weakly increases it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-24T13:08:31Z)
• Algorithmic Decision Making with Conditional Fairness [48.76267073341723]
  We define conditional fairness as a more sound fairness metric by conditioning on the fairness variables. We propose a Derivable Conditional Fairness Regularizer (DCFR) to track the trade-off between precision and fairness of algorithmic decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-18T12:56:28Z)

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.