Simulating Biases for Interpretable Fairness in Offline and Online Classifiers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.10154v1
• Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 11:04:24 GMT
• Title: Simulating Biases for Interpretable Fairness in Offline and Online Classifiers
• Authors: Ricardo Inácio, Zafeiris Kokkinogenis, Vitor Cerqueira, Carlos Soares,
• Abstract summary: Mitigation methods are critical to ensure that model outcomes are adjusted to be fair.<n>We develop a framework for synthetic dataset generation with controllable bias injection.<n>In experiments, both offline and online learning approaches are employed.
• Score: 0.35998666903987897
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Predictive models often reinforce biases which were originally embedded in their training data, through skewed decisions. In such cases, mitigation methods are critical to ensure that, regardless of the prevailing disparities, model outcomes are adjusted to be fair. To assess this, datasets could be systematically generated with specific biases, to train machine learning classifiers. Then, predictive outcomes could aid in the understanding of this bias embedding process. Hence, an agent-based model (ABM), depicting a loan application process that represents various systemic biases across two demographic groups, was developed to produce synthetic datasets. Then, by applying classifiers trained on them to predict loan outcomes, we can assess how biased data leads to unfairness. This highlights a main contribution of this work: a framework for synthetic dataset generation with controllable bias injection. We also contribute with a novel explainability technique, which shows how mitigations affect the way classifiers leverage data features, via second-order Shapley values. In experiments, both offline and online learning approaches are employed. Mitigations are applied at different stages of the modelling pipeline, such as during pre-processing and in-processing.

Related papers

• Planted in Pretraining, Swayed by Finetuning: A Case Study on the Origins of Cognitive Biases in LLMs [51.00909549291524]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit cognitive biases.<n>These biases vary across models and can be amplified by instruction tuning.<n>It remains unclear if these differences in biases stem from pretraining, finetuning, or even random noise.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-09T18:01:14Z)
• Diffusing DeBias: Synthetic Bias Amplification for Model Debiasing [15.214861534330236]
  We introduce Diffusing DeBias (DDB) as a plug-in for common methods of unsupervised model debiasing.<n>Specifically, our approach adopts conditional diffusion models to generate synthetic bias-aligned images.<n>By tackling the fundamental issue of bias-conflicting training samples in learning auxiliary models, our proposed method beats current state-of-the-art in multiple benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-13T18:17:03Z)
• Fairness Feedback Loops: Training on Synthetic Data Amplifies Bias [47.79659355705916]
  Model-induced distribution shifts (MIDS) occur as previous model outputs pollute new model training sets over generations of models. We introduce a framework that allows us to track multiple MIDS over many generations, finding that they can lead to loss in performance, fairness, and minoritized group representation. Despite these negative consequences, we identify how models might be used for positive, intentional, interventions in their data ecosystems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-12T17:48:08Z)
• Improving Bias Mitigation through Bias Experts in Natural Language Understanding [10.363406065066538]
  We propose a new debiasing framework that introduces binary classifiers between the auxiliary model and the main model. Our proposed strategy improves the bias identification ability of the auxiliary model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-06T16:15:00Z)
• From Fake to Real: Pretraining on Balanced Synthetic Images to Prevent Spurious Correlations in Image Recognition [64.59093444558549]
  We propose a simple, easy-to-implement, two-step training pipeline that we call From Fake to Real. By training on real and synthetic data separately, FFR does not expose the model to the statistical differences between real and synthetic data. Our experiments show that FFR improves worst group accuracy over the state-of-the-art by up to 20% over three datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-08T19:52:28Z)
• On Comparing Fair Classifiers under Data Bias [42.43344286660331]
  We study the effect of varying data biases on the accuracy and fairness of fair classifiers. Our experiments show how to integrate a measure of data bias risk in the existing fairness dashboards for real-world deployments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-12T13:04:46Z)
• Systematic Evaluation of Predictive Fairness [60.0947291284978]
  Mitigating bias in training on biased datasets is an important open problem. We examine the performance of various debiasing methods across multiple tasks. We find that data conditions have a strong influence on relative model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-17T05:40:13Z)
• Investigating Bias with a Synthetic Data Generator: Empirical Evidence and Philosophical Interpretation [66.64736150040093]
  Machine learning applications are becoming increasingly pervasive in our society. Risk is that they will systematically spread the bias embedded in data. We propose to analyze biases by introducing a framework for generating synthetic data with specific types of bias and their combinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-13T11:18:50Z)
• Prisoners of Their Own Devices: How Models Induce Data Bias in Performative Prediction [4.874780144224057]
  A biased model can make decisions that disproportionately harm certain groups in society. Much work has been devoted to measuring unfairness in static ML environments, but not in dynamic, performative prediction ones. We propose a taxonomy to characterize bias in the data, and study cases where it is shaped by model behaviour.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-27T10:56:04Z)
• CMW-Net: Learning a Class-Aware Sample Weighting Mapping for Robust Deep Learning [55.733193075728096]
  Modern deep neural networks can easily overfit to biased training data containing corrupted labels or class imbalance. Sample re-weighting methods are popularly used to alleviate this data bias issue. We propose a meta-model capable of adaptively learning an explicit weighting scheme directly from data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-11T13:49:51Z)
• 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)
• Fairness-Aware Online Personalization [16.320648868892526]
  We present a study of fairness in online personalization settings involving the ranking of individuals. We first demonstrate that online personalization can cause the model to learn to act in an unfair manner if the user is biased in his/her responses. We then formulate the problem of learning personalized models under fairness constraints and present a regularization based approach for mitigating biases in machine learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-30T07:16:17Z)

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.