Fairness Evaluation with Item Response Theory

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.02414v1
• Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2024 22:25:20 GMT
• Title: Fairness Evaluation with Item Response Theory
• Authors: Ziqi Xu, Sevvandi Kandanaarachchi, Cheng Soon Ong, Eirini Ntoutsi,
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes a novel Fair-IRT framework to evaluate fairness in Machine Learning (ML) models. Detailed explanations for item characteristic curves (ICCs) are provided for particular individuals. Experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of this framework as a fairness evaluation tool.
• Score: 10.871079276188649
• License:
• Abstract: Item Response Theory (IRT) has been widely used in educational psychometrics to assess student ability, as well as the difficulty and discrimination of test questions. In this context, discrimination specifically refers to how effectively a question distinguishes between students of different ability levels, and it does not carry any connotation related to fairness. In recent years, IRT has been successfully used to evaluate the predictive performance of Machine Learning (ML) models, but this paper marks its first application in fairness evaluation. In this paper, we propose a novel Fair-IRT framework to evaluate a set of predictive models on a set of individuals, while simultaneously eliciting specific parameters, namely, the ability to make fair predictions (a feature of predictive models), as well as the discrimination and difficulty of individuals that affect the prediction results. Furthermore, we conduct a series of experiments to comprehensively understand the implications of these parameters for fairness evaluation. Detailed explanations for item characteristic curves (ICCs) are provided for particular individuals. We propose the flatness of ICCs to disentangle the unfairness between individuals and predictive models. The experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of this framework as a fairness evaluation tool. Two real-world case studies illustrate its potential application in evaluating fairness in both classification and regression tasks. Our paper aligns well with the Responsible Web track by proposing a Fair-IRT framework to evaluate fairness in ML models, which directly contributes to the development of a more inclusive, equitable, and trustworthy AI.

Related papers

• Evaluating the Fairness of Discriminative Foundation Models in Computer Vision [51.176061115977774]
  We propose a novel taxonomy for bias evaluation of discriminative foundation models, such as Contrastive Language-Pretraining (CLIP) We then systematically evaluate existing methods for mitigating bias in these models with respect to our taxonomy. Specifically, we evaluate OpenAI's CLIP and OpenCLIP models for key applications, such as zero-shot classification, image retrieval and image captioning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T10:32:39Z)
• 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)
• Is Your Model "MADD"? A Novel Metric to Evaluate Algorithmic Fairness for Predictive Student Models [0.0]
  We propose a novel metric, the Model Absolute Density Distance (MADD), to analyze models' discriminatory behaviors. We evaluate our approach on the common task of predicting student success in online courses, using several common predictive classification models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T16:55:49Z)
• Counterfactually Fair Regression with Double Machine Learning [0.0]
  This paper proposes Double Machine Learning (DML) Fairness. It analogises this problem of counterfactual fairness in regression problems to that of estimating counterfactual outcomes in causal inference. It demonstrates the approach in a simulation study pertaining to discrimination in workplace hiring and an application on real data estimating the GPAs of law school students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-21T01:28:23Z)
• DualFair: Fair Representation Learning at Both Group and Individual Levels via Contrastive Self-supervision [73.80009454050858]
  This work presents a self-supervised model, called DualFair, that can debias sensitive attributes like gender and race from learned representations. Our model jointly optimize for two fairness criteria - group fairness and counterfactual fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-15T07:13:54Z)
• Counterfactual Fair Opportunity: Measuring Decision Model Fairness with Counterfactual Reasoning [5.626570248105078]
  This work aims to unveil unfair model behaviors using counterfactual reasoning in the case of fairness under unawareness setting. A counterfactual version of equal opportunity named counterfactual fair opportunity is defined and two novel metrics that analyze the sensitive information of counterfactual samples are introduced.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-16T09:13:53Z)
• SF-PATE: Scalable, Fair, and Private Aggregation of Teacher Ensembles [50.90773979394264]
  This paper studies a model that protects the privacy of individuals' sensitive information while also allowing it to learn non-discriminatory predictors. A key characteristic of the proposed model is to enable the adoption of off-the-selves and non-private fair models to create a privacy-preserving and fair model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-11T14:42:54Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• FAIR: Fair Adversarial Instance Re-weighting [0.7829352305480285]
  We propose a Fair Adrial Instance Re-weighting (FAIR) method, which uses adversarial training to learn instance weighting function that ensures fair predictions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first model that merges reweighting and adversarial approaches by means of a weighting function that can provide interpretable information about fairness of individual instances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-15T10:48:56Z)
• Fairness by Explicability and Adversarial SHAP Learning [0.0]
  We propose a new definition of fairness that emphasises the role of an external auditor and model explicability. We develop a framework for mitigating model bias using regularizations constructed from the SHAP values of an adversarial surrogate model. We demonstrate our approaches using gradient and adaptive boosting on: a synthetic dataset, the UCI Adult (Census) dataset and a real-world credit scoring dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-11T14:36:34Z)

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.