Quantifying Query Fairness Under Unawareness

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.04140v1
• Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 16:31:44 GMT
• Title: Quantifying Query Fairness Under Unawareness
• Authors: Thomas Jaenich, Alejandro Moreo, Alessandro Fabris, Graham McDonald, Andrea Esuli, Iadh Ounis, Fabrizio Sebastiani,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a robust fairness estimator based on quantification that effectively handles multiple sensitive attributes beyond binary classifications.<n>Our method outperforms existing baselines across various sensitive attributes and is the first to establish a reliable protocol for measuring fairness under unawareness.
• Score: 82.33181164973365
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Traditional ranking algorithms are designed to retrieve the most relevant items for a user's query, but they often inherit biases from data that can unfairly disadvantage vulnerable groups. Fairness in information access systems (IAS) is typically assessed by comparing the distribution of groups in a ranking to a target distribution, such as the overall group distribution in the dataset. These fairness metrics depend on knowing the true group labels for each item. However, when groups are defined by demographic or sensitive attributes, these labels are often unknown, leading to a setting known as "fairness under unawareness". To address this, group membership can be inferred using machine-learned classifiers, and group prevalence is estimated by counting the predicted labels. Unfortunately, such an estimation is known to be unreliable under dataset shift, compromising the accuracy of fairness evaluations. In this paper, we introduce a robust fairness estimator based on quantification that effectively handles multiple sensitive attributes beyond binary classifications. Our method outperforms existing baselines across various sensitive attributes and, to the best of our knowledge, is the first to establish a reliable protocol for measuring fairness under unawareness across multiple queries and groups.

Related papers

• FALE: Fairness-Aware ALE Plots for Auditing Bias in Subgroups [0.8528401618469597]
  We propose an explainability method tailored to identifying potential bias in subgroups and visualizing the findings in a user friendly manner to end users. We envision FALE to function as an efficient, user friendly, comprehensible and reliable first-stage tool for identifying subgroups with potential bias issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T13:30:57Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Learning Fair Classifiers with Partially Annotated Group Labels [22.838927494573436]
  We consider a more practical scenario dubbed as Algorithmic Fairness with annotated Group labels (FairPG) We propose a simple auxiliary group assignment (CGL) that is readily applicable to any fairness-aware learning strategy. We show that our method design is better than the vanilla pseudo-labeling strategy in terms of fairness criteria.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-29T15:11:18Z)
• On Releasing Annotator-Level Labels and Information in Datasets [6.546195629698355]
  We show that label aggregation may introduce representational biases of individual and group perspectives. We propose recommendations for increased utility and transparency of datasets for downstream use cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-12T02:35:45Z)
• Measuring Fairness Under Unawareness of Sensitive Attributes: A Quantification-Based Approach [131.20444904674494]
  We tackle the problem of measuring group fairness under unawareness of sensitive attributes. We show that quantification approaches are particularly suited to tackle the fairness-under-unawareness problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-17T13:45:46Z)
• Estimation of Fair Ranking Metrics with Incomplete Judgments [70.37717864975387]
  We propose a sampling strategy and estimation technique for four fair ranking metrics. We formulate a robust and unbiased estimator which can operate even with very limited number of labeled items.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-11T10:57:00Z)
• MultiFair: Multi-Group Fairness in Machine Learning [52.24956510371455]
  We study multi-group fairness in machine learning (MultiFair) We propose a generic end-to-end algorithmic framework to solve it. Our proposed framework is generalizable to many different settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-24T02:30:22Z)

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.