The epistemic dimension of algorithmic fairness: assessing its impact in innovation diffusion and fair policy making

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.02856v1
• Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 22:48:34 GMT
• Title: The epistemic dimension of algorithmic fairness: assessing its impact in innovation diffusion and fair policy making
• Authors: Eugenia Villa, Camilla Quaresmini, Valentina Breschi, Viola Schiaffonati, Mara Tanelli,
• Abstract summary: We focus on characterizing and analyzing the impact of a credibility deficit or excess on the diffusion of innovations on a societal scale.<n>We extend the well-established Linear Threshold Model to show the impact of epistemic biases in innovation diffusion.<n>Our results shed light on the pivotal role the epistemic dimension might have in the debate of algorithmic fairness in decision-making.
• Score: 3.267556217287181
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Algorithmic fairness is an expanding field that addresses a range of discrimination issues associated with algorithmic processes. However, most works in the literature focus on analyzing it only from an ethical perspective, focusing on moral principles and values that should be considered in the design and evaluation of algorithms, while disregarding the epistemic dimension related to knowledge transmission and validation. However, this aspect of algorithmic fairness should also be included in the debate, as it is crucial to introduce a specific type of harm: an individual may be systematically excluded from the dissemination of knowledge due to the attribution of a credibility deficit/excess. In this work, we specifically focus on characterizing and analyzing the impact of this credibility deficit or excess on the diffusion of innovations on a societal scale, a phenomenon driven by individual attitudes and social interactions, and also by the strength of mutual connections. Indeed, discrimination might shape the latter, ultimately modifying how innovations spread within the network. In this light, to incorporate, also from a formal point of view, the epistemic dimension in innovation diffusion models becomes paramount, especially if these models are intended to support fair policy design. For these reasons, we formalize the epistemic properties of a social environment, by extending the well-established Linear Threshold Model (LTM) in an epistemic direction to show the impact of epistemic biases in innovation diffusion. Focusing on the impact of epistemic bias in both open-loop and closed-loop scenarios featuring optimal fostering policies, our results shed light on the pivotal role the epistemic dimension might have in the debate of algorithmic fairness in decision-making.

Related papers

• Advancing Fairness in Natural Language Processing: From Traditional Methods to Explainability [0.9065034043031668]
  The thesis addresses the need for equity and transparency in NLP systems. It introduces an innovative algorithm to mitigate biases in high-risk NLP applications. It also presents a model-agnostic explainability method that identifies and ranks concepts in Transformer models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T12:38:58Z)
• Reconciling Heterogeneous Effects in Causal Inference [44.99833362998488]
  We apply the Reconcile algorithm for model multiplicity in machine learning to reconcile heterogeneous effects in causal inference. Our results have tangible implications for ensuring fair outcomes in high-stakes such as healthcare, insurance, and housing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T18:43:46Z)
• On the Societal Impact of Open Foundation Models [93.67389739906561]
  We focus on open foundation models, defined here as those with broadly available model weights. We identify five distinctive properties of open foundation models that lead to both their benefits and risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-27T16:49:53Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Evidential Regression [72.30888739450343]
  A new approach with uncertainty-aware regression-based neural networks (NNs) shows promise over traditional deterministic methods and typical Bayesian NNs. We detail the theoretical shortcomings and analyze the performance on synthetic and real-world data sets, showing that Deep Evidential Regression is a quantification rather than an exact uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-20T10:10:32Z)
• Non-Linear Spectral Dimensionality Reduction Under Uncertainty [107.01839211235583]
  We propose a new dimensionality reduction framework, called NGEU, which leverages uncertainty information and directly extends several traditional approaches. We show that the proposed NGEU formulation exhibits a global closed-form solution, and we analyze, based on the Rademacher complexity, how the underlying uncertainties theoretically affect the generalization ability of the framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-09T19:01:33Z)
• Promises and Challenges of Causality for Ethical Machine Learning [2.1946447418179664]
  We lay out the conditions for appropriate application of causal fairness under the "potential outcomes framework" We highlight key aspects of causal inference that are often ignored in the causal fairness literature. We argue that such conceptualization of the intervention is key in evaluating the validity of causal assumptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T00:04:10Z)
• Impact Remediation: Optimal Interventions to Reduce Inequality [10.806517393212491]
  We develop a novel algorithmic framework for tackling pre-existing real-world disparities. The purpose of our framework is to measure real-world disparities and discover optimal intervention policies. In contrast to most work on optimal policy learning, we explore disparity reduction itself as an objective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-01T16:35:12Z)
• Supercharging Imbalanced Data Learning With Energy-based Contrastive Representation Transfer [72.5190560787569]
  In computer vision, learning from long tailed datasets is a recurring theme, especially for natural image datasets. Our proposal posits a meta-distributional scenario, where the data generating mechanism is invariant across the label-conditional feature distributions. This allows us to leverage a causal data inflation procedure to enlarge the representation of minority classes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-25T00:13:11Z)
• No computation without representation: Avoiding data and algorithm biases through diversity [11.12971845021808]
  We draw connections between the lack of diversity within academic and professional computing fields and the type and breadth of the biases encountered in datasets. We use these lessons to develop recommendations that provide concrete steps for the computing community to increase diversity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-26T23:07:39Z)

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.