Dataset Representativeness and Downstream Task Fairness

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00170v1
• Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:11:16 GMT
• Title: Dataset Representativeness and Downstream Task Fairness
• Authors: Victor Borza, Andrew Estornell, Chien-Ju Ho, Bradley Malin, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik,
• Abstract summary: We demonstrate that there is a natural tension between dataset representativeness and group-fairness of classifiers trained on that dataset. We also find that over-sampling underrepresented groups can result in classifiers which exhibit greater bias to those groups.
• Score: 24.570493924073524
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Our society collects data on people for a wide range of applications, from building a census for policy evaluation to running meaningful clinical trials. To collect data, we typically sample individuals with the goal of accurately representing a population of interest. However, current sampling processes often collect data opportunistically from data sources, which can lead to datasets that are biased and not representative, i.e., the collected dataset does not accurately reflect the distribution of demographics of the true population. This is a concern because subgroups within the population can be under- or over-represented in a dataset, which may harm generalizability and lead to an unequal distribution of benefits and harms from downstream tasks that use such datasets (e.g., algorithmic bias in medical decision-making algorithms). In this paper, we assess the relationship between dataset representativeness and group-fairness of classifiers trained on that dataset. We demonstrate that there is a natural tension between dataset representativeness and classifier fairness; empirically we observe that training datasets with better representativeness can frequently result in classifiers with higher rates of unfairness. We provide some intuition as to why this occurs via a set of theoretical results in the case of univariate classifiers. We also find that over-sampling underrepresented groups can result in classifiers which exhibit greater bias to those groups. Lastly, we observe that fairness-aware sampling strategies (i.e., those which are specifically designed to select data with high downstream fairness) will often over-sample members of majority groups. These results demonstrate that the relationship between dataset representativeness and downstream classifier fairness is complex; balancing these two quantities requires special care from both model- and dataset-designers.

Related papers

• Group-blind optimal transport to group parity and its constrained variants [6.70948761466883]
  We design a single group-blind projection map that aligns the feature distributions of both groups in the source data. We assume that the source data are unbiased representation of the population. We present numerical results on synthetic data and real data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T17:14:07Z)
• Tackling Diverse Minorities in Imbalanced Classification [80.78227787608714]
  Imbalanced datasets are commonly observed in various real-world applications, presenting significant challenges in training classifiers. We propose generating synthetic samples iteratively by mixing data samples from both minority and majority classes. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed framework through extensive experiments conducted on seven publicly available benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T18:48:34Z)
• Deep Learning on a Healthy Data Diet: Finding Important Examples for Fairness [15.210232622716129]
  Data-driven predictive solutions predominant in commercial applications tend to suffer from biases and stereotypes. Data augmentation reduces gender bias by adding counterfactual examples to the training dataset. We show that some of the examples in the augmented dataset can be not important or even harmful for fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-20T22:42:30Z)
• Rethinking Data Heterogeneity in Federated Learning: Introducing a New Notion and Standard Benchmarks [65.34113135080105]
  We show that not only the issue of data heterogeneity in current setups is not necessarily a problem but also in fact it can be beneficial for the FL participants. Our observations are intuitive. Our code is available at https://github.com/MMorafah/FL-SC-NIID.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T17:15:19Z)
• 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)
• Towards Group Robustness in the presence of Partial Group Labels [61.33713547766866]
  spurious correlations between input samples and the target labels wrongly direct the neural network predictions. We propose an algorithm that optimize for the worst-off group assignments from a constraint set. We show improvements in the minority group's performance while preserving overall aggregate accuracy across groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-10T22:04:48Z)
• Representation Matters: Assessing the Importance of Subgroup Allocations in Training Data [85.43008636875345]
  We show that diverse representation in training data is key to increasing subgroup performances and achieving population level objectives. Our analysis and experiments describe how dataset compositions influence performance and provide constructive results for using trends in existing data, alongside domain knowledge, to help guide intentional, objective-aware dataset design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-05T00:27:08Z)
• 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.