Towards Fair Machine Learning Software: Understanding and Addressing Model Bias Through Counterfactual Thinking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.08018v2
• Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 03:10:21 GMT
• Title: Towards Fair Machine Learning Software: Understanding and Addressing Model Bias Through Counterfactual Thinking
• Authors: Zichong Wang, Yang Zhou, Israat Haque, David Lo, Wenbin Zhang,
• Abstract summary: We present a novel counterfactual approach to tackle the root causes of bias in Machine Learning software. Our approach combines models optimized for both performance and fairness, resulting in an optimal solution in both aspects.
• Score: 11.668325856032023
• License:
• Abstract: The increasing use of Machine Learning (ML) software can lead to unfair and unethical decisions, thus fairness bugs in software are becoming a growing concern. Addressing these fairness bugs often involves sacrificing ML performance, such as accuracy. To address this issue, we present a novel counterfactual approach that uses counterfactual thinking to tackle the root causes of bias in ML software. In addition, our approach combines models optimized for both performance and fairness, resulting in an optimal solution in both aspects. We conducted a thorough evaluation of our approach on 10 benchmark tasks using a combination of 5 performance metrics, 3 fairness metrics, and 15 measurement scenarios, all applied to 8 real-world datasets. The conducted extensive evaluations show that the proposed method significantly improves the fairness of ML software while maintaining competitive performance, outperforming state-of-the-art solutions in 84.6% of overall cases based on a recent benchmarking tool.

Related papers

• The Dual-use Dilemma in LLMs: Do Empowering Ethical Capacities Make a Degraded Utility? [54.18519360412294]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) must balance between rejecting harmful requests for safety and accommodating legitimate ones for utility. This paper presents a Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) based alignment framework that achieves better overall performance. Our resulting model, LibraChem, outperforms leading LLMs including Claude-3, GPT-4o, and LLaMA-3 by margins of 13.44%, 7.16%, and 7.10% respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-20T06:35:01Z)
• Analyzing Fairness of Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing Models [1.0923877073891446]
  Machine learning (ML) algorithms play a crucial role in decision making across diverse fields such as healthcare, finance, education, and law enforcement. Despite their widespread adoption, these systems raise ethical and social concerns due to potential biases and fairness issues. This study focuses on evaluating and improving the fairness of Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing (NLP) models applied to unstructured datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-13T06:35:55Z)
• Automatic Evaluation for Text-to-image Generation: Task-decomposed Framework, Distilled Training, and Meta-evaluation Benchmark [62.58869921806019]
  We propose a task decomposition evaluation framework based on GPT-4o to automatically construct a new training dataset. We design innovative training strategies to effectively distill GPT-4o's evaluation capabilities into a 7B open-source MLLM, MiniCPM-V-2.6. Experimental results demonstrate that our distilled open-source MLLM significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art GPT-4o-base baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T08:06:06Z)
• 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)
• Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification [52.095460362197336]
  Large language models (LLMs) struggle with consistent and accurate reasoning. LLMs are trained primarily on correct solutions, reducing their ability to detect and learn from errors. We propose a novel collaborative method integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Program-of-Thought (PoT) solutions for verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T05:21:48Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making. We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill. Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• Uncertainty Aware Learning for Language Model Alignment [97.36361196793929]
  We propose uncertainty-aware learning (UAL) to improve the model alignment of different task scenarios. We implement UAL in a simple fashion -- adaptively setting the label smoothing value of training according to the uncertainty of individual samples. Experiments on widely used benchmarks demonstrate that our UAL significantly and consistently outperforms standard supervised fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-07T11:37:45Z)
• Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning Beyond Accuracy [50.09931172314218]
  We introduce ReasonEval, a new methodology for evaluating the quality of reasoning steps. We show that ReasonEval consistently outperforms baseline methods in the meta-evaluation datasets. We observe that ReasonEval can play a significant role in data selection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-08T17:18:04Z)
• Fix Fairness, Don't Ruin Accuracy: Performance Aware Fairness Repair using AutoML [18.17660645381856]
  We propose a novel approach that utilizes automated machine learning (AutoML) techniques to mitigate bias. By improving the default optimization function of AutoML and incorporating fairness objectives, we are able to mitigate bias with little to no loss of accuracy. Our approach, Fair-AutoML, successfully repaired 60 out of 64 buggy cases, while existing bias mitigation techniques only repaired up to 44 out of 64 cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T17:25:15Z)
• FITNESS: A Causal De-correlation Approach for Mitigating Bias in Machine Learning Software [6.4073906779537095]
  Biased datasets can lead to unfair and potentially harmful outcomes. In this paper, we propose a bias mitigation approach via de-correlating the causal effects between sensitive features and the label. Our key idea is that by de-correlating such effects from a causality perspective, the model would avoid making predictions based on sensitive features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T06:24:43Z)
• A Comprehensive Empirical Study of Bias Mitigation Methods for Software Fairness [27.67313504037565]
  We present a large-scale, comprehensive empirical evaluation of bias mitigation methods. bias mitigation methods were evaluated with 12 Machine Learning (ML) performance metrics, 4 fairness metrics, and 24 types of fairness-performance trade-off assessment. The effectiveness of the bias mitigation methods depends on tasks, models, and fairness and ML performance metrics, and there is no'silver bullet' bias mitigation method demonstrated to be effective for all scenarios studied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-07T13:14:49Z)

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.