Fair Feature Selection: A Comparison of Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithms

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.02752v1
• Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 11:43:11 GMT
• Title: Fair Feature Selection: A Comparison of Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithms
• Authors: James Brookhouse and Alex Freitas
• Abstract summary: This paper focuses on fair feature selection for classification, i.e. methods that select a feature subset aimed at maximising both the accuracy and the fairness of the predictions made by a classifier. We compare two recently proposed Genetic Algorithms (GAs) for fair feature selection that are based on two different multi-objective optimisation approaches.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Machine learning classifiers are widely used to make decisions with a major impact on people's lives (e.g. accepting or denying a loan, hiring decisions, etc). In such applications,the learned classifiers need to be both accurate and fair with respect to different groups of people, with different values of variables such as sex and race. This paper focuses on fair feature selection for classification, i.e. methods that select a feature subset aimed at maximising both the accuracy and the fairness of the predictions made by a classifier. More specifically, we compare two recently proposed Genetic Algorithms (GAs) for fair feature selection that are based on two different multi-objective optimisation approaches: (a) a Pareto dominance-based GA; and (b) a lexicographic optimisation-based GA, where maximising accuracy has higher priority than maximising fairness. Both GAs use the same measures of accuracy and fairness, allowing for a controlled comparison. As far as we know, this is the first comparison between the Pareto and lexicographic approaches for fair classification. The results show that, overall, the lexicographic GA outperformed the Pareto GA with respect to accuracy without degradation of the fairness of the learned classifiers. This is an important result because at present nearly all GAs for fair classification are based on the Pareto approach, so these results suggest a promising new direction for research in this area.

Related papers

• Class-attribute Priors: Adapting Optimization to Heterogeneity and Fairness Objective [54.33066660817495]
  Modern classification problems exhibit heterogeneities across individual classes. We propose CAP: An effective and general method that generates a class-specific learning strategy. We show that CAP is competitive with prior art and its flexibility unlocks clear benefits for fairness objectives beyond balanced accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-25T17:43:39Z)
• Bi-discriminator Domain Adversarial Neural Networks with Class-Level Gradient Alignment [87.8301166955305]
  We propose a novel bi-discriminator domain adversarial neural network with class-level gradient alignment. BACG resorts to gradient signals and second-order probability estimation for better alignment of domain distributions. In addition, inspired by contrastive learning, we develop a memory bank-based variant, i.e. Fast-BACG, which can greatly shorten the training process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-21T09:53:17Z)
• 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)
• Bipartite Ranking Fairness through a Model Agnostic Ordering Adjustment [54.179859639868646]
  We propose a model agnostic post-processing framework xOrder for achieving fairness in bipartite ranking. xOrder is compatible with various classification models and ranking fairness metrics, including supervised and unsupervised fairness metrics. We evaluate our proposed algorithm on four benchmark data sets and two real-world patient electronic health record repositories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-27T07:42:44Z)
• A GA-like Dynamic Probability Method With Mutual Information for Feature Selection [1.290382979353427]
  We propose a GA-like dynamic probability (GADP) method with mutual information. As each gene's probability is independent, the chromosome variety in GADP is more notable than in traditional GA. To verify our method's superiority, we evaluate our method under multiple conditions on 15 datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-21T13:30:01Z)
• Fairly Accurate: Learning Optimal Accuracy vs. Fairness Tradeoffs for Hate Speech Detection [8.841221697099687]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-15T22:11:25Z)
• Unbiased Subdata Selection for Fair Classification: A Unified Framework and Scalable Algorithms [0.8376091455761261]
  We show that many classification models within this framework can be recast as mixed-integer convex programs. We then show that in the proposed problem, when the classification outcomes, "unsolvable subdata selection," is strongly-solvable. This motivates us to develop an iterative refining strategy (IRS) to solve the classification instances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-22T21:09:38Z)
• Selective Classification Can Magnify Disparities Across Groups [89.14499988774985]
  We find that while selective classification can improve average accuracies, it can simultaneously magnify existing accuracy disparities. Increasing abstentions can even decrease accuracies on some groups. We train distributionally-robust models that achieve similar full-coverage accuracies across groups and show that selective classification uniformly improves each group.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-27T08:51:30Z)
• Towards Model-Agnostic Post-Hoc Adjustment for Balancing Ranking Fairness and Algorithm Utility [54.179859639868646]
  Bipartite ranking aims to learn a scoring function that ranks positive individuals higher than negative ones from labeled data. There have been rising concerns on whether the learned scoring function can cause systematic disparity across different protected groups. We propose a model post-processing framework for balancing them in the bipartite ranking scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-15T10:08:39Z)
• Genetic programming approaches to learning fair classifiers [4.901632310846025]
  We discuss current approaches to fairness and motivate proposals that incorporate fairness into genetic programming for classification. The first is to incorporate a fairness objective into multi-objective optimization. The second is to adapt lexicase selection to define cases dynamically over intersections of protected groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-28T04:20:25Z)

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.