Aleatoric and Epistemic Discrimination: Fundamental Limits of Fairness Interventions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2301.11781v3
• Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:58:43 GMT
• Title: Aleatoric and Epistemic Discrimination: Fundamental Limits of Fairness Interventions
• Authors: Hao Wang, Luxi He, Rui Gao, Flavio P. Calmon,
• Abstract summary: Machine learning models can underperform on certain population groups due to choices made during model development and bias inherent in the data. We quantify aleatoric discrimination by determining the performance limits of a model under fairness constraints. We quantify epistemic discrimination as the gap between a model's accuracy when fairness constraints are applied and the limit posed by aleatoric discrimination.
• Score: 13.279926364884512
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Machine learning (ML) models can underperform on certain population groups due to choices made during model development and bias inherent in the data. We categorize sources of discrimination in the ML pipeline into two classes: aleatoric discrimination, which is inherent in the data distribution, and epistemic discrimination, which is due to decisions made during model development. We quantify aleatoric discrimination by determining the performance limits of a model under fairness constraints, assuming perfect knowledge of the data distribution. We demonstrate how to characterize aleatoric discrimination by applying Blackwell's results on comparing statistical experiments. We then quantify epistemic discrimination as the gap between a model's accuracy when fairness constraints are applied and the limit posed by aleatoric discrimination. We apply this approach to benchmark existing fairness interventions and investigate fairness risks in data with missing values. Our results indicate that state-of-the-art fairness interventions are effective at removing epistemic discrimination on standard (overused) tabular datasets. However, when data has missing values, there is still significant room for improvement in handling aleatoric discrimination.

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)
• Causal Fair Machine Learning via Rank-Preserving Interventional Distributions [0.5062312533373299]
  We define individuals as being normatively equal if they are equal in a fictitious, normatively desired (FiND) world. We propose rank-preserving interventional distributions to define a specific FiND world in which this holds. We show that our warping approach effectively identifies the most discriminated individuals and mitigates unfairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-24T13:46:50Z)
• Learning for Counterfactual Fairness from Observational Data [62.43249746968616]
  Fairness-aware machine learning aims to eliminate biases of learning models against certain subgroups described by certain protected (sensitive) attributes such as race, gender, and age. A prerequisite for existing methods to achieve counterfactual fairness is the prior human knowledge of the causal model for the data. In this work, we address the problem of counterfactually fair prediction from observational data without given causal models by proposing a novel framework CLAIRE.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-17T04:08:29Z)
• 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)
• Marrying Fairness and Explainability in Supervised Learning [0.0]
  We formalize direct discrimination as a direct causal effect of the protected attributes on the decisions. We find that state-of-the-art fair learning methods can induce discrimination via association or reverse discrimination. We propose to nullify the influence of the protected attribute on the output of the system, while preserving the influence of remaining features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-06T17:26:58Z)
• Statistical discrimination in learning agents [64.78141757063142]
  Statistical discrimination emerges in agent policies as a function of both the bias in the training population and of agent architecture. We show that less discrimination emerges with agents that use recurrent neural networks, and when their training environment has less bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-21T18:28:57Z)
• Personalized Trajectory Prediction via Distribution Discrimination [78.69458579657189]
  Trarimiy prediction is confronted with the dilemma to capture the multi-modal nature of future dynamics. We present a distribution discrimination (DisDis) method to predict personalized motion patterns. Our method can be integrated with existing multi-modal predictive models as a plug-and-play module.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-29T17:42:12Z)
• Balancing Biases and Preserving Privacy on Balanced Faces in the Wild [50.915684171879036]
  There are demographic biases present in current facial recognition (FR) models. We introduce our Balanced Faces in the Wild dataset to measure these biases across different ethnic and gender subgroups. We find that relying on a single score threshold to differentiate between genuine and imposters sample pairs leads to suboptimal results. We propose a novel domain adaptation learning scheme that uses facial features extracted from state-of-the-art neural networks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-16T15:05:49Z)
• Fairness in Semi-supervised Learning: Unlabeled Data Help to Reduce Discrimination [53.3082498402884]
  A growing specter in the rise of machine learning is whether the decisions made by machine learning models are fair. We present a framework of fair semi-supervised learning in the pre-processing phase, including pseudo labeling to predict labels for unlabeled data. A theoretical decomposition analysis of bias, variance and noise highlights the different sources of discrimination and the impact they have on fairness in semi-supervised learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-25T05:48:56Z)
• Convex Fairness Constrained Model Using Causal Effect Estimators [6.414055487487486]
  We devise novel models, called FairCEEs, which remove discrimination while keeping explanatory bias. We provide an efficient algorithm for solving FairCEEs in regression and binary classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-16T03:40:04Z)
• Learning from Discriminatory Training Data [2.1869017389979266]
  Supervised learning systems are trained using historical data and, if the data was tainted by discrimination, they may unintentionally learn to discriminate against protected groups. We propose that fair learning methods, despite training on potentially discriminatory datasets, shall perform well on fair test datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-12-17T18:53:23Z)

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.