Cascaded Debiasing: Studying the Cumulative Effect of Multiple Fairness-Enhancing Interventions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.03734v2
• Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 19:12:04 GMT
• Title: Cascaded Debiasing: Studying the Cumulative Effect of Multiple Fairness-Enhancing Interventions
• Authors: Bhavya Ghai, Mihir Mishra, Klaus Mueller
• Abstract summary: This paper investigates the cumulative effect of multiple fairness enhancing interventions at different stages of the machine learning (ML) pipeline. Applying multiple interventions results in better fairness and lower utility than individual interventions on aggregate. On the downside, fairness-enhancing interventions can negatively impact different population groups, especially the privileged group.
• Score: 48.98659895355356
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Understanding the cumulative effect of multiple fairness enhancing interventions at different stages of the machine learning (ML) pipeline is a critical and underexplored facet of the fairness literature. Such knowledge can be valuable to data scientists/ML practitioners in designing fair ML pipelines. This paper takes the first step in exploring this area by undertaking an extensive empirical study comprising 60 combinations of interventions, 9 fairness metrics, 2 utility metrics (Accuracy and F1 Score) across 4 benchmark datasets. We quantitatively analyze the experimental data to measure the impact of multiple interventions on fairness, utility and population groups. We found that applying multiple interventions results in better fairness and lower utility than individual interventions on aggregate. However, adding more interventions do no always result in better fairness or worse utility. The likelihood of achieving high performance (F1 Score) along with high fairness increases with larger number of interventions. On the downside, we found that fairness-enhancing interventions can negatively impact different population groups, especially the privileged group. This study highlights the need for new fairness metrics that account for the impact on different population groups apart from just the disparity between groups. Lastly, we offer a list of combinations of interventions that perform best for different fairness and utility metrics to aid the design of fair ML pipelines.

Related papers

• Fairpriori: Improving Biased Subgroup Discovery for Deep Neural Network Fairness [21.439820064223877]
  This paper introduces Fairpriori, a novel biased subgroup discovery method. It incorporates the frequent itemset generation algorithm to facilitate effective and efficient investigation of intersectional bias. Fairpriori demonstrates superior effectiveness and efficiency when identifying intersectional bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T00:15:13Z)
• Fairness-enhancing mixed effects deep learning improves fairness on in- and out-of-distribution clustered (non-iid) data [6.596656267996196]
  We introduce the Fair Mixed Effects Deep Learning (Fair MEDL) framework. Fair MEDL quantifies cluster-invariant fixed effects (FE) and cluster-specific random effects (RE) We incorporate adversarial debiasing to promote fairness across three key metrics: Equalized Odds, Demographic Parity, and Counterfactual Fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-04T20:18:45Z)
• Learning Informative Representation for Fairness-aware Multivariate Time-series Forecasting: A Group-based Perspective [50.093280002375984]
  Performance unfairness among variables widely exists in multivariate time series (MTS) forecasting models. We propose a novel framework, named FairFor, for fairness-aware MTS forecasting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-27T04:54:12Z)
• Increasing Fairness via Combination with Learning Guarantees [8.314000998551865]
  We propose a fairness quality measure named discriminative risk to reflect both individual and group fairness aspects. We also propose first- and second-order oracle bounds to show that fairness can be boosted via ensemble combination with theoretical learning guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-25T20:31:06Z)
• Fair Effect Attribution in Parallel Online Experiments [57.13281584606437]
  A/B tests serve the purpose of reliably identifying the effect of changes introduced in online services. It is common for online platforms to run a large number of simultaneous experiments by splitting incoming user traffic randomly. Despite a perfect randomization between different groups, simultaneous experiments can interact with each other and create a negative impact on average population outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-15T17:15:51Z)
• Fairness-aware Model-agnostic Positive and Unlabeled Learning [38.50536380390474]
  We propose a fairness-aware Positive and Unlabeled Learning (PUL) method named FairPUL. For binary classification over individuals from two populations, we aim to achieve similar true positive rates and false positive rates. Our framework is proven to be statistically consistent in terms of both the classification error and the fairness metric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-19T08:04:23Z)
• Normalise for Fairness: A Simple Normalisation Technique for Fairness in Regression Machine Learning Problems [46.93320580613236]
  We present a simple, yet effective method based on normalisation (FaiReg) for regression problems. We compare it with two standard methods for fairness, namely data balancing and adversarial training. The results show the superior performance of diminishing the effects of unfairness better than data balancing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-02T12:26:25Z)
• MultiFair: Multi-Group Fairness in Machine Learning [52.24956510371455]
  We study multi-group fairness in machine learning (MultiFair) We propose a generic end-to-end algorithmic framework to solve it. Our proposed framework is generalizable to many different settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-24T02:30:22Z)
• Two Simple Ways to Learn Individual Fairness Metrics from Data [47.6390279192406]
  Individual fairness is an intuitive definition of algorithmic fairness that addresses some of the drawbacks of group fairness. The lack of a widely accepted fair metric for many ML tasks is the main barrier to broader adoption of individual fairness. We show empirically that fair training with the learned metrics leads to improved fairness on three machine learning tasks susceptible to gender and racial biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-19T23:47:15Z)

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.