Understanding trade-offs in classifier bias with quality-diversity optimization: an application to talent management

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16965v1
• Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:14:02 GMT
• Title: Understanding trade-offs in classifier bias with quality-diversity optimization: an application to talent management
• Authors: Catalina M Jaramillo, Paul Squires, Julian Togelius,
• Abstract summary: A major struggle for the development of fair AI models lies in the bias implicit in the data available to train such models. We propose a method for visualizing the biases inherent in a dataset and understanding the potential trade-offs between fairness and accuracy.
• Score: 2.334978724544296
• License:
• Abstract: Fairness,the impartial treatment towards individuals or groups regardless of their inherent or acquired characteristics [20], is a critical challenge for the successful implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in multiple fields like finances, human capital, and housing. A major struggle for the development of fair AI models lies in the bias implicit in the data available to train such models. Filtering or sampling the dataset before training can help ameliorate model bias but can also reduce model performance and the bias impact can be opaque. In this paper, we propose a method for visualizing the biases inherent in a dataset and understanding the potential trade-offs between fairness and accuracy. Our method builds on quality-diversity optimization, in particular Covariance Matrix Adaptation Multi-dimensional Archive of Phenotypic Elites (MAP-Elites). Our method provides a visual representation of bias in models, allows users to identify models within a minimal threshold of fairness, and determines the trade-off between fairness and accuracy.

Related papers

• From Efficiency to Equity: Measuring Fairness in Preference Learning [3.2132738637761027]
  We evaluate fairness in preference learning models inspired by economic theories of inequality and Rawlsian justice. We propose metrics adapted from the Gini Coefficient, Atkinson Index, and Kuznets Ratio to quantify fairness in these models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T15:25:56Z)
• Enhancing Fairness in Neural Networks Using FairVIC [0.0]
  Mitigating bias in automated decision-making systems, specifically deep learning models, is a critical challenge in achieving fairness. We introduce FairVIC, an innovative approach designed to enhance fairness in neural networks by addressing inherent biases at the training stage. We observe a significant improvement in fairness across all metrics tested, without compromising the model's accuracy to a detrimental extent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-28T10:10:21Z)
• Debiasing Multimodal Models via Causal Information Minimization [65.23982806840182]
  We study bias arising from confounders in a causal graph for multimodal data. Robust predictive features contain diverse information that helps a model generalize to out-of-distribution data. We use these features as confounder representations and use them via methods motivated by causal theory to remove bias from models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-28T16:46:14Z)
• Fast Model Debias with Machine Unlearning [54.32026474971696]
  Deep neural networks might behave in a biased manner in many real-world scenarios. Existing debiasing methods suffer from high costs in bias labeling or model re-training. We propose a fast model debiasing framework (FMD) which offers an efficient approach to identify, evaluate and remove biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T08:10:57Z)
• Non-Invasive Fairness in Learning through the Lens of Data Drift [88.37640805363317]
  We show how to improve the fairness of Machine Learning models without altering the data or the learning algorithm. We use a simple but key insight: the divergence of trends between different populations, and, consecutively, between a learned model and minority populations, is analogous to data drift. We explore two strategies (model-splitting and reweighing) to resolve this drift, aiming to improve the overall conformance of models to the underlying data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-30T17:30:42Z)
• 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)
• Delving into Identify-Emphasize Paradigm for Combating Unknown Bias [52.76758938921129]
  We propose an effective bias-conflicting scoring method (ECS) to boost the identification accuracy. We also propose gradient alignment (GA) to balance the contributions of the mined bias-aligned and bias-conflicting samples. Experiments are conducted on multiple datasets in various settings, demonstrating that the proposed solution can mitigate the impact of unknown biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-22T14:50:24Z)
• Simultaneous Improvement of ML Model Fairness and Performance by Identifying Bias in Data [1.76179873429447]
  We propose a data preprocessing technique that can detect instances ascribing a specific kind of bias that should be removed from the dataset before training. In particular, we claim that in the problem settings where instances exist with similar feature but different labels caused by variation in protected attributes, an inherent bias gets induced in the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-24T13:04:07Z)
• A Differentiable Distance Approximation for Fairer Image Classification [31.471917430653626]
  We propose a differentiable approximation of the variance of demographics, a metric that can be used to measure the bias, or unfairness, in an AI model. Our approximation can be optimised alongside the regular training objective which eliminates the need for any extra models during training. We demonstrate that our approach improves the fairness of AI models in varied task and dataset scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-09T23:02:18Z)
• Learning from others' mistakes: Avoiding dataset biases without modeling them [111.17078939377313]
  State-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) models often learn to model dataset biases and surface form correlations instead of features that target the intended task. Previous work has demonstrated effective methods to circumvent these issues when knowledge of the bias is available. We show a method for training models that learn to ignore these problematic correlations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-02T16:10:54Z)

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.