Fairly Accurate: Learning Optimal Accuracy vs. Fairness Tradeoffs for Hate Speech Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2204.07661v1
• Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 22:11:25 GMT
• Title: Fairly Accurate: Learning Optimal Accuracy vs. Fairness Tradeoffs for Hate Speech Detection
• Authors: Venelin Kovatchev, Soumyajit Gupta, Matthew Lease
• Abstract summary: We introduce a differentiable measure that enables direct optimization of group fairness in model training. We evaluate our methods on the specific task of hate speech detection. Empirical results across convolutional, sequential, and transformer-based neural architectures show superior empirical accuracy vs. fairness trade-offs over prior work.
• Score: 8.841221697099687
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent work has emphasized the importance of balancing competing objectives in model training (e.g., accuracy vs. fairness, or competing measures of fairness). Such trade-offs reflect a broader class of multi-objective optimization (MOO) problems in which optimization methods seek Pareto optimal trade-offs between competing goals. In this work, we first introduce a differentiable measure that enables direct optimization of group fairness (specifically, balancing accuracy across groups) in model training. Next, we demonstrate two model-agnostic MOO frameworks for learning Pareto optimal parameterizations over different groups of neural classification models. We evaluate our methods on the specific task of hate speech detection, in which prior work has shown lack of group fairness across speakers of different English dialects. Empirical results across convolutional, sequential, and transformer-based neural architectures show superior empirical accuracy vs. fairness trade-offs over prior work. More significantly, our measure enables the Pareto machinery to ensure that each architecture achieves the best possible trade-off between fairness and accuracy w.r.t. the dataset, given user-prescribed error tolerance bounds.

Related papers

• Understanding trade-offs in classifier bias with quality-diversity optimization: an application to talent management [2.334978724544296]
  A major struggle for the development of fair AI models lies in the bias implicit in the data available to train such models. We propose a method for visualizing the biases inherent in a dataset and understanding the potential trade-offs between fairness and accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T22:14:02Z)
• Fair Bilevel Neural Network (FairBiNN): On Balancing fairness and accuracy via Stackelberg Equilibrium [0.3350491650545292]
  Current methods for mitigating bias often result in information loss and an inadequate balance between accuracy and fairness. We propose a novel methodology grounded in bilevel optimization principles. Our deep learning-based approach concurrently optimize for both accuracy and fairness objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T18:53:39Z)
• Fairness-Aware Meta-Learning via Nash Bargaining [63.44846095241147]
  We introduce a two-stage meta-learning framework to address issues of group-level fairness in machine learning. The first stage involves the use of a Nash Bargaining Solution (NBS) to resolve hypergradient conflicts and steer the model. We show empirical effects across various fairness objectives in six key fairness datasets and two image classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T07:34:15Z)
• Emulating Full Participation: An Effective and Fair Client Selection Strategy for Federated Learning [50.060154488277036]
  In federated learning, client selection is a critical problem that significantly impacts both model performance and fairness. We propose two guiding principles that tackle the inherent conflict between the two metrics while reinforcing each other. Our approach adaptively enhances this diversity by selecting clients based on their data distributions, thereby improving both model performance and fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-22T12:27:24Z)
• Marginal Debiased Network for Fair Visual Recognition [59.05212866862219]
  We propose a novel marginal debiased network (MDN) to learn debiased representations. Our MDN can achieve a remarkable performance on under-represented samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-04T08:57:09Z)
• Fairness-enhancing mixed effects deep learning improves fairness on in- and out-of-distribution clustered (non-iid) data [6.596656267996196]
  We propose the Fair Mixed Effects Deep Learning (Fair MEDL) framework. This framework quantifies cluster-invariant fixed effects (FE) and cluster-specific random effects (RE) through: 1) a cluster adversary for learning invariant FE, 2) a Bayesian neural network for RE, and 3) a mixing function combining FE and RE for final predictions. Fair MEDL framework improves fairness by 86.4% for Age, 64.9% for Race, 57.8% for Sex, and 36.2% for Marital status, while maintaining robust predictive performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-04T20:18:45Z)
• Boosting Fair Classifier Generalization through Adaptive Priority Reweighing [59.801444556074394]
  A performance-promising fair algorithm with better generalizability is needed. This paper proposes a novel adaptive reweighing method to eliminate the impact of the distribution shifts between training and test data on model generalizability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-15T13:04:55Z)
• Fair Few-shot Learning with Auxiliary Sets [53.30014767684218]
  In many machine learning (ML) tasks, only very few labeled data samples can be collected, which can lead to inferior fairness performance. In this paper, we define the fairness-aware learning task with limited training samples as the emphfair few-shot learning problem. We devise a novel framework that accumulates fairness-aware knowledge across different meta-training tasks and then generalizes the learned knowledge to meta-test tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T06:31:37Z)
• Optimizing fairness tradeoffs in machine learning with multiobjective meta-models [0.913755431537592]
  We present a flexible framework for defining the fair machine learning task as a weighted classification problem with multiple cost functions. We use multiobjective optimization to define the sample weights used in model training for a given machine learner, and adapt the weights to optimize multiple metrics of fairness and accuracy. On a set of real-world problems, this approach outperforms current state-of-the-art methods by finding solution sets with preferable error/fairness trade-offs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-21T13:42:49Z)
• DualFair: Fair Representation Learning at Both Group and Individual Levels via Contrastive Self-supervision [73.80009454050858]
  This work presents a self-supervised model, called DualFair, that can debias sensitive attributes like gender and race from learned representations. Our model jointly optimize for two fairness criteria - group fairness and counterfactual fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-15T07:13:54Z)
• FairAdaBN: Mitigating unfairness with adaptive batch normalization and its application to dermatological disease classification [14.589159162086926]
  We propose FairAdaBN, which makes batch normalization adaptive to sensitive attribute. We propose a new metric, named Fairness-Accuracy Trade-off Efficiency (FATE), to compute normalized fairness improvement over accuracy drop. Experiments on two dermatological datasets show that our proposed method outperforms other methods on fairness criteria and FATE.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-15T02:22:07Z)
• Mitigating Unfairness via Evolutionary Multi-objective Ensemble Learning [0.8563354084119061]
  Optimising one or several fairness measures may sacrifice or deteriorate other measures. A multi-objective evolutionary learning framework is used to simultaneously optimise several metrics. Our proposed algorithm can provide decision-makers with better tradeoffs among accuracy and multiple fairness metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-30T06:34:10Z)
• Learning Optimal Fair Classification Trees: Trade-offs Between Interpretability, Fairness, and Accuracy [7.215903549622416]
  We propose a mixed integer optimization framework for learning optimal classification trees. We benchmark our method against state-of-the-art approaches for fair classification on popular datasets. Our method consistently finds decisions with almost full parity, while other methods rarely do.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-24T19:47:10Z)
• Accurate and Robust Feature Importance Estimation under Distribution Shifts [49.58991359544005]
  PRoFILE is a novel feature importance estimation method. We show significant improvements over state-of-the-art approaches, both in terms of fidelity and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-30T05:29:01Z)
• 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)
• Deep F-measure Maximization for End-to-End Speech Understanding [52.36496114728355]
  We propose a differentiable approximation to the F-measure and train the network with this objective using standard backpropagation. We perform experiments on two standard fairness datasets, Adult, Communities and Crime, and also on speech-to-intent detection on the ATIS dataset and speech-to-image concept classification on the Speech-COCO dataset. In all four of these tasks, F-measure results in improved micro-F1 scores, with absolute improvements of up to 8% absolute, as compared to models trained with the cross-entropy loss function.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-08T03:02:27Z)
• Accuracy and Fairness Trade-offs in Machine Learning: A Stochastic Multi-Objective Approach [0.0]
  In the application of machine learning to real-life decision-making systems, the prediction outcomes might discriminate against people with sensitive attributes, leading to unfairness. The commonly used strategy in fair machine learning is to include fairness as a constraint or a penalization term in the minimization of the prediction loss. In this paper, we introduce a new approach to handle fairness by formulating a multi-objective optimization problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-03T18:51:24Z)
• Meta-Learned Confidence for Few-shot Learning [60.6086305523402]
  A popular transductive inference technique for few-shot metric-based approaches, is to update the prototype of each class with the mean of the most confident query examples. We propose to meta-learn the confidence for each query sample, to assign optimal weights to unlabeled queries. We validate our few-shot learning model with meta-learned confidence on four benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-27T10:22:17Z)
• Precise Tradeoffs in Adversarial Training for Linear Regression [55.764306209771405]
  We provide a precise and comprehensive understanding of the role of adversarial training in the context of linear regression with Gaussian features. We precisely characterize the standard/robust accuracy and the corresponding tradeoff achieved by a contemporary mini-max adversarial training approach. Our theory for adversarial training algorithms also facilitates the rigorous study of how a variety of factors (size and quality of training data, model overparametrization etc.) affect the tradeoff between these two competing accuracies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-24T19:01:47Z)

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.