Evaluating Fair Feature Selection in Machine Learning for Healthcare

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.19165v2
• Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 10:20:09 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Fair Feature Selection in Machine Learning for Healthcare
• Authors: Md Rahat Shahriar Zawad, Peter Washington,
• Abstract summary: We explore algorithmic fairness from the perspective of feature selection. We evaluate a fair feature selection method that considers equal importance to all demographic groups. We tested our approach on three publicly available healthcare datasets.
• Score: 0.9222623206734782
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: With the universal adoption of machine learning in healthcare, the potential for the automation of societal biases to further exacerbate health disparities poses a significant risk. We explore algorithmic fairness from the perspective of feature selection. Traditional feature selection methods identify features for better decision making by removing resource-intensive, correlated, or non-relevant features but overlook how these factors may differ across subgroups. To counter these issues, we evaluate a fair feature selection method that considers equal importance to all demographic groups. We jointly considered a fairness metric and an error metric within the feature selection process to ensure a balance between minimizing both bias and global classification error. We tested our approach on three publicly available healthcare datasets. On all three datasets, we observed improvements in fairness metrics coupled with a minimal degradation of balanced accuracy. Our approach addresses both distributive and procedural fairness within the fair machine learning context.

Related papers

• Equal Confusion Fairness: Measuring Group-Based Disparities in Automated Decision Systems [5.076419064097733]
  This paper proposes a new equal confusion fairness test to check an automated decision system for fairness and a new confusion parity error to quantify the extent of any unfairness. Overall, the methods and metrics provided here may assess automated decision systems' fairness as part of a more extensive accountability assessment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-02T04:44:19Z)
• M$^3$Fair: Mitigating Bias in Healthcare Data through Multi-Level and Multi-Sensitive-Attribute Reweighting Method [13.253174531040106]
  We propose M3Fair, a multi-level and multi-sensitive-attribute reweighting method by extending the RW method to multiple sensitive attributes at multiple levels. Our experiments on real-world datasets show that the approach is effective, straightforward, and generalizable in addressing the healthcare fairness issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-07T03:20:44Z)
• 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)
• Fair Machine Learning in Healthcare: A Review [90.22219142430146]
  We analyze the intersection of fairness in machine learning and healthcare disparities. We provide a critical review of the associated fairness metrics from a machine learning standpoint. We propose several new research directions that hold promise for developing ethical and equitable ML applications in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-29T04:32:10Z)
• Towards a Fairness-Aware Scoring System for Algorithmic Decision-Making [35.21763166288736]
  We propose a general framework to create data-driven fairness-aware scoring systems. We show that the proposed framework provides practitioners or policymakers great flexibility to select their desired fairness requirements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-21T09:46:35Z)
• Measuring Fairness Under Unawareness of Sensitive Attributes: A Quantification-Based Approach [131.20444904674494]
  We tackle the problem of measuring group fairness under unawareness of sensitive attributes. We show that quantification approaches are particularly suited to tackle the fairness-under-unawareness problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-17T13:45:46Z)
• MultiFair: Multi-Group Fairness in Machine Learning [52.24956510371455]
  We study multi-group fairness in machine learning (MultiFair) We propose a generic end-to-end algorithmic framework to solve it. Our proposed framework is generalizable to many different settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-24T02:30:22Z)
• Estimating and Improving Fairness with Adversarial Learning [65.99330614802388]
  We propose an adversarial multi-task training strategy to simultaneously mitigate and detect bias in the deep learning-based medical image analysis system. Specifically, we propose to add a discrimination module against bias and a critical module that predicts unfairness within the base classification model. We evaluate our framework on a large-scale public-available skin lesion dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-07T03:10:32Z)
• 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)
• Causal Feature Selection for Algorithmic Fairness [61.767399505764736]
  We consider fairness in the integration component of data management. We propose an approach to identify a sub-collection of features that ensure the fairness of the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-10T20:20:10Z)

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.