On Prediction-Modelers and Decision-Makers: Why Fairness Requires More
Than a Fair Prediction Model
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.05598v1
- Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 10:34:42 GMT
- Title: On Prediction-Modelers and Decision-Makers: Why Fairness Requires More
Than a Fair Prediction Model
- Authors: Teresa Scantamburlo, Joachim Baumann, Christoph Heitz
- Abstract summary: An implicit ambiguity in the field of prediction-based decision-making regards the relation between the concepts of prediction and decision.
We show the different ways in which these two elements influence the final fairness properties of a prediction-based decision system.
We propose a framework that enables a better understanding and reasoning of the conceptual logic of creating fairness in prediction-based decision-making.
- Score: 1.3996171129586732
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: An implicit ambiguity in the field of prediction-based decision-making
regards the relation between the concepts of prediction and decision. Much of
the literature in the field tends to blur the boundaries between the two
concepts and often simply speaks of 'fair prediction.' In this paper, we point
out that a differentiation of these concepts is helpful when implementing
algorithmic fairness. Even if fairness properties are related to the features
of the used prediction model, what is more properly called 'fair' or 'unfair'
is a decision system, not a prediction model. This is because fairness is about
the consequences on human lives, created by a decision, not by a prediction. We
clarify the distinction between the concepts of prediction and decision and
show the different ways in which these two elements influence the final
fairness properties of a prediction-based decision system. In addition to
exploring this relationship conceptually and practically, we propose a
framework that enables a better understanding and reasoning of the conceptual
logic of creating fairness in prediction-based decision-making. In our
framework, we specify different roles, namely the 'prediction-modeler' and the
'decision-maker,' and the information required from each of them for being able
to implement fairness of the system. Our framework allows for deriving distinct
responsibilities for both roles and discussing some insights related to ethical
and legal requirements. Our contribution is twofold. First, we shift the focus
from abstract algorithmic fairness to context-dependent decision-making,
recognizing diverse actors with unique objectives and independent actions.
Second, we provide a conceptual framework that can help structure
prediction-based decision problems with respect to fairness issues, identify
responsibilities, and implement fairness governance mechanisms in real-world
scenarios.
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 Explainability using Optimal Transport with Applications in
Image Classification [0.46040036610482665]
We propose a comprehensive approach to uncover the causes of discrimination in Machine Learning applications.
We leverage Wasserstein barycenters to achieve fair predictions and introduce an extension to pinpoint bias-associated regions.
This allows us to derive a cohesive system which uses the enforced fairness to measure each features influence emphon the bias.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-22T00:10:23Z) - 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) - 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) - Reconciling Predictive and Statistical Parity: A Causal Approach [68.59381759875734]
We propose a new causal decomposition formula for the fairness measures associated with predictive parity.
We show that the notions of statistical and predictive parity are not really mutually exclusive, but complementary and spanning a spectrum of fairness notions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-08T09:23:22Z) - 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) - What-is and How-to for Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey,
Reflection, and Perspective [13.124434298120494]
We review and reflect on various fairness notions previously proposed in machine learning literature.
We also consider the long-term impact that is induced by current prediction and decision.
This paper demonstrates the importance of matching the mission (which kind of fairness one would like to enforce) and the means (which spectrum of fairness analysis is of interest) to fulfill the intended purpose.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-08T18:05:46Z) - A Justice-Based Framework for the Analysis of Algorithmic
Fairness-Utility Trade-Offs [0.0]
In prediction-based decision-making systems, different perspectives can be at odds.
The short-term business goals of the decision makers are often in conflict with the decision subjects' wish to be treated fairly.
We propose a framework to make these value-laden choices clearly visible.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-06T20:31:55Z) - The Equity Framework: Fairness Beyond Equalized Predictive Outcomes [0.0]
We study fairness issues that arise when decision-makers use models that deviate from the models that depict the physical and social environment.
We formulate an Equity Framework that considers equal access to the model, equal outcomes from the model, and equal utilization of the model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-18T20:49:51Z) - Measuring Fairness of Text Classifiers via Prediction Sensitivity [63.56554964580627]
ACCUMULATED PREDICTION SENSITIVITY measures fairness in machine learning models based on the model's prediction sensitivity to perturbations in input features.
We show that the metric can be theoretically linked with a specific notion of group fairness (statistical parity) and individual fairness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-03-16T15:00:33Z) - Legal perspective on possible fairness measures - A legal discussion
using the example of hiring decisions (preprint) [0.0]
We explain the different kinds of fairness concepts that might be applicable for the specific application of hiring decisions.
We analyze their pros and cons with regard to the respective fairness interpretation and evaluate them from a legal perspective.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-08-16T06:41:39Z)
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.