Algorithmic Fairness: A Tolerance Perspective

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.09543v1
• Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:16:54 GMT
• Title: Algorithmic Fairness: A Tolerance Perspective
• Authors: Renqiang Luo, Tao Tang, Feng Xia, Jiaying Liu, Chengpei Xu, Leo Yu Zhang, Wei Xiang, Chengqi Zhang,
• Abstract summary: This survey delves into the existing literature on algorithmic fairness, specifically highlighting its multifaceted social consequences. We introduce a novel taxonomy based on 'tolerance', a term we define as the degree to which variations in fairness outcomes are acceptable. Our systematic review covers diverse industries, revealing critical insights into the balance between algorithmic decision making and social equity.
• Score: 31.882207568746168
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advancements in machine learning and deep learning have brought algorithmic fairness into sharp focus, illuminating concerns over discriminatory decision making that negatively impacts certain individuals or groups. These concerns have manifested in legal, ethical, and societal challenges, including the erosion of trust in intelligent systems. In response, this survey delves into the existing literature on algorithmic fairness, specifically highlighting its multifaceted social consequences. We introduce a novel taxonomy based on 'tolerance', a term we define as the degree to which variations in fairness outcomes are acceptable, providing a structured approach to understanding the subtleties of fairness within algorithmic decisions. Our systematic review covers diverse industries, revealing critical insights into the balance between algorithmic decision making and social equity. By synthesizing these insights, we outline a series of emerging challenges and propose strategic directions for future research and policy making, with the goal of advancing the field towards more equitable algorithmic systems.

Related papers

• A Survey on Intersectional Fairness in Machine Learning: Notions, Mitigation, and Challenges [11.885166133818819]
  Adoption of Machine Learning systems has led to increased concerns about fairness implications. We present a taxonomy for intersectional notions of fairness and mitigation. We identify the key challenges and provide researchers with guidelines for future directions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-11T16:49:22Z)
• Fairness meets Cross-Domain Learning: a new perspective on Models and Metrics [80.07271410743806]
  We study the relationship between cross-domain learning (CD) and model fairness. We introduce a benchmark on face and medical images spanning several demographic groups as well as classification and localization tasks. Our study covers 14 CD approaches alongside three state-of-the-art fairness algorithms and shows how the former can outperform the latter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-25T09:34:05Z)
• Individual Fairness under Uncertainty [26.183244654397477]
  Algorithmic fairness is an established area in machine learning (ML) algorithms. We propose an individual fairness measure and a corresponding algorithm that deal with the challenges of uncertainty arising from censorship in class labels. We argue that this perspective represents a more realistic model of fairness research for real-world application deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-16T01:07:58Z)
• Fairness in Matching under Uncertainty [78.39459690570531]
  algorithmic two-sided marketplaces have drawn attention to the issue of fairness in such settings. We axiomatize a notion of individual fairness in the two-sided marketplace setting which respects the uncertainty in the merits. We design a linear programming framework to find fair utility-maximizing distributions over allocations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T00:30:32Z)
• Fair Decision-making Under Uncertainty [1.5688552250473473]
  We study a longitudinal censored learning problem subject to fairness constraints. We show how the newly devised fairness notions involving censored information and the general framework for fair predictions in the presence of censorship allow us to measure and discrimination under uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-29T05:42:39Z)
• 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)
• Developing a Philosophical Framework for Fair Machine Learning: Lessons From The Case of Algorithmic Collusion [0.0]
  As machine learning algorithms are applied in new contexts the harms and injustices that result are qualitatively different. The existing research paradigm in machine learning which develops metrics and definitions of fairness cannot account for these qualitatively different types of injustice. I propose an ethical framework for researchers and practitioners in machine learning seeking to develop and apply fairness metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-05T16:21:56Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• Anatomizing Bias in Facial Analysis [86.79402670904338]
  Existing facial analysis systems have been shown to yield biased results against certain demographic subgroups. It has become imperative to ensure that these systems do not discriminate based on gender, identity, or skin tone of individuals. This has led to research in the identification and mitigation of bias in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-13T09:51:13Z)
• A Sociotechnical View of Algorithmic Fairness [16.184328505946763]
  Algorithmic fairness has been framed as a newly emerging technology that mitigates systemic discrimination in automated decision-making. We argue that fairness is an inherently social concept and that technologies for algorithmic fairness should therefore be approached through a sociotechnical lens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-27T21:17:16Z)
• On Consequentialism and Fairness [64.35872952140677]
  We provide a consequentialist critique of common definitions of fairness within machine learning. We conclude with a broader discussion of the issues of learning and randomization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-02T05:39:48Z)

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.