Algorithmic Fairness in Business Analytics: Directions for Research and
Practice
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2207.10991v1
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 10:21:38 GMT
- Title: Algorithmic Fairness in Business Analytics: Directions for Research and
Practice
- Authors: Maria De-Arteaga and Stefan Feuerriegel and Maytal Saar-Tsechansky
- Abstract summary: This paper offers a forward-looking, BA-focused review of algorithmic fairness.
We first review the state-of-the-art research on sources and measures of bias, as well as bias mitigation algorithms.
We then provide a detailed discussion of the utility-fairness relationship, emphasizing that the frequent assumption of a trade-off between these two constructs is often mistaken or short-sighted.
- Score: 24.309795052068388
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: The extensive adoption of business analytics (BA) has brought financial gains
and increased efficiencies. However, these advances have simultaneously drawn
attention to rising legal and ethical challenges when BA inform decisions with
fairness implications. As a response to these concerns, the emerging study of
algorithmic fairness deals with algorithmic outputs that may result in
disparate outcomes or other forms of injustices for subgroups of the
population, especially those who have been historically marginalized. Fairness
is relevant on the basis of legal compliance, social responsibility, and
utility; if not adequately and systematically addressed, unfair BA systems may
lead to societal harms and may also threaten an organization's own survival,
its competitiveness, and overall performance. This paper offers a
forward-looking, BA-focused review of algorithmic fairness. We first review the
state-of-the-art research on sources and measures of bias, as well as bias
mitigation algorithms. We then provide a detailed discussion of the
utility-fairness relationship, emphasizing that the frequent assumption of a
trade-off between these two constructs is often mistaken or short-sighted.
Finally, we chart a path forward by identifying opportunities for business
scholars to address impactful, open challenges that are key to the effective
and responsible deployment of BA.
Related papers
- Fairness-Accuracy Trade-Offs: A Causal Perspective [58.06306331390586]
We analyze the tension between fairness and accuracy from a causal lens for the first time.
We show that enforcing a causal constraint often reduces the disparity between demographic groups.
We introduce a new neural approach for causally-constrained fair learning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-24T11:19:52Z) - Fairness in Algorithmic Recourse Through the Lens of Substantive
Equality of Opportunity [15.78130132380848]
Algorithmic recourse has gained attention as a means of giving persons agency in their interactions with AI systems.
Recent work has shown that recourse itself may be unfair due to differences in the initial circumstances of individuals.
Time is a critical element in recourse because the longer it takes an individual to act, the more the setting may change.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-29T11:55:45Z) - Causal Fairness for Outcome Control [68.12191782657437]
We study a specific decision-making task called outcome control in which an automated system aims to optimize an outcome variable $Y$ while being fair and equitable.
In this paper, we first analyze through causal lenses the notion of benefit, which captures how much a specific individual would benefit from a positive decision.
We then note that the benefit itself may be influenced by the protected attribute, and propose causal tools which can be used to analyze this.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-08T09:31:18Z) - 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) - Beyond Incompatibility: Trade-offs between Mutually Exclusive Fairness Criteria in Machine Learning and Law [2.959308758321417]
We present a novel algorithm (FAir Interpolation Method: FAIM) for continuously interpolating between three fairness criteria.
We demonstrate the effectiveness of our algorithm when applied to synthetic data, the COMPAS data set, and a new, real-world data set from the e-commerce sector.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-01T12:47:54Z) - Causal Fairness Analysis [68.12191782657437]
We introduce a framework for understanding, modeling, and possibly solving issues of fairness in decision-making settings.
The main insight of our approach will be to link the quantification of the disparities present on the observed data with the underlying, and often unobserved, collection of causal mechanisms.
Our effort culminates in the Fairness Map, which is the first systematic attempt to organize and explain the relationship between different criteria found in the literature.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-07-23T01:06:34Z) - Fairness in Recommender Systems: Research Landscape and Future
Directions [119.67643184567623]
We review the concepts and notions of fairness that were put forward in the area in the recent past.
We present an overview of how research in this field is currently operationalized.
Overall, our analysis of recent works points to certain research gaps.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-23T08:34:25Z) - Justice in Misinformation Detection Systems: An Analysis of Algorithms,
Stakeholders, and Potential Harms [2.5372245630249632]
We show how injustices materialize for stakeholders across three algorithmic stages in the misinformation detection pipeline.
This framework should help researchers, policymakers, and practitioners reason about potential harms or risks associated with algorithmic misinformation detection.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-28T15:31:13Z) - Unfairness Despite Awareness: Group-Fair Classification with Strategic
Agents [37.31138342300617]
We show that strategic agents may possess both the ability and the incentive to manipulate an observed feature vector in order to attain a more favorable outcome.
We further demonstrate that both the increased selectiveness of the fair classifier, and consequently the loss of fairness, arises when performing fair learning on domains in which the advantaged group is overrepresented.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-12-06T02:42:43Z) - BeFair: Addressing Fairness in the Banking Sector [54.08949958349055]
We present the initial results of an industrial open innovation project in the banking sector.
We propose a general roadmap for fairness in ML and the implementation of a toolkit called BeFair that helps to identify and mitigate bias.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-02-03T16:37:10Z)
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.