Racial/Ethnic Categories in AI and Algorithmic Fairness: Why They Matter and What They Represent

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.06717v1
• Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 04:04:05 GMT
• Title: Racial/Ethnic Categories in AI and Algorithmic Fairness: Why They Matter and What They Represent
• Authors: Jennifer Mickel,
• Abstract summary: We show how racial categories with unclear assumptions and little justification can lead to varying datasets that poorly represent groups. We also develop a framework, CIRCSheets, for documenting the choices and assumptions in choosing racial categories and the process of racialization into these categories.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Racial diversity has become increasingly discussed within the AI and algorithmic fairness literature, yet little attention is focused on justifying the choices of racial categories and understanding how people are racialized into these chosen racial categories. Even less attention is given to how racial categories shift and how the racialization process changes depending on the context of a dataset or model. An unclear understanding of \textit{who} comprises the racial categories chosen and \textit{how} people are racialized into these categories can lead to varying interpretations of these categories. These varying interpretations can lead to harm when the understanding of racial categories and the racialization process is misaligned from the actual racialization process and racial categories used. Harm can also arise if the racialization process and racial categories used are irrelevant or do not exist in the context they are applied. In this paper, we make two contributions. First, we demonstrate how racial categories with unclear assumptions and little justification can lead to varying datasets that poorly represent groups obfuscated or unrepresented by the given racial categories and models that perform poorly on these groups. Second, we develop a framework, CIRCSheets, for documenting the choices and assumptions in choosing racial categories and the process of racialization into these categories to facilitate transparency in understanding the processes and assumptions made by dataset or model developers when selecting or using these racial categories.

Related papers

• The Factuality Tax of Diversity-Intervened Text-to-Image Generation: Benchmark and Fact-Augmented Intervention [61.80236015147771]
  We quantify the trade-off between using diversity interventions and preserving demographic factuality in T2I models. Experiments on DoFaiR reveal that diversity-oriented instructions increase the number of different gender and racial groups. We propose Fact-Augmented Intervention (FAI) to reflect on verbalized or retrieved factual information about gender and racial compositions of generation subjects in history.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-29T09:09:42Z)
• Machines Do See Color: A Guideline to Classify Different Forms of Racist Discourse in Large Corpora [0.0]
  Current methods to identify and classify racist language in text rely on small-n qualitative approaches or large-n approaches focusing exclusively on overt forms of racist discourse. This article provides a step-by-step generalizable guideline to identify and classify different forms of racist discourse in large corpora.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T16:57:18Z)
• An Empirical Analysis of Racial Categories in the Algorithmic Fairness Literature [2.2713084727838115]
  We analyze how race is conceptualized and formalized in algorithmic fairness frameworks. We find that differing notions of race are adopted inconsistently, at times even within a single analysis. We argue that the construction of racial categories is a value-laden process with significant social and political consequences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-12T21:23:29Z)
• On Disentangled and Locally Fair Representations [95.6635227371479]
  We study the problem of performing classification in a manner that is fair for sensitive groups, such as race and gender. We learn a locally fair representation, such that, under the learned representation, the neighborhood of each sample is balanced in terms of the sensitive attribute.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-05T14:26:50Z)
• Fair Group-Shared Representations with Normalizing Flows [68.29997072804537]
  We develop a fair representation learning algorithm which is able to map individuals belonging to different groups in a single group. We show experimentally that our methodology is competitive with other fair representation learning algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-17T10:49:49Z)
• Mitigating Racial Biases in Toxic Language Detection with an Equity-Based Ensemble Framework [9.84413545378636]
  Recent research has demonstrated how racial biases against users who write African American English exist in popular toxic language datasets. We propose additional descriptive fairness metrics to better understand the source of these biases. We show that our proposed framework substantially reduces the racial biases that the model learns from these datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-27T15:54:05Z)
• Fairness for Image Generation with Uncertain Sensitive Attributes [97.81354305427871]
  This work tackles the issue of fairness in the context of generative procedures, such as image super-resolution. While traditional group fairness definitions are typically defined with respect to specified protected groups, we emphasize that there are no ground truth identities. We show that the natural extension of demographic parity is strongly dependent on the grouping, and emphimpossible to achieve obliviously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-23T06:17:17Z)
• Avoiding bias when inferring race using name-based approaches [0.8543368663496084]
  We use information from the U.S. Census and mortgage applications to infer the race of U.S. affiliated authors in the Web of Science. Our results demonstrate that the validity of name based inference varies by race/ethnicity and that threshold approaches underestimate Black authors and overestimate White authors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-14T08:36:22Z)
• One Label, One Billion Faces: Usage and Consistency of Racial Categories in Computer Vision [75.82110684355979]
  We study the racial system encoded by computer vision datasets supplying categorical race labels for face images. We find that each dataset encodes a substantially unique racial system, despite nominally equivalent racial categories. We find evidence that racial categories encode stereotypes, and exclude ethnic groups from categories on the basis of nonconformity to stereotypes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-03T22:50:04Z)
• Contrastive Examples for Addressing the Tyranny of the Majority [83.93825214500131]
  We propose to create a balanced training dataset, consisting of the original dataset plus new data points in which the group memberships are intervened. We show that current generative adversarial networks are a powerful tool for learning these data points, called contrastive examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-14T14:06:44Z)

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.