Partial Identification Approach to Counterfactual Fairness Assessment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.00163v1
• Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 18:35:08 GMT
• Title: Partial Identification Approach to Counterfactual Fairness Assessment
• Authors: Saeyoung Rho, Junzhe Zhang, Elias Bareinboim,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a Bayesian approach to bound unknown counterfactual fairness measures with high confidence.<n>Our results reveal a positive (spurious) effect on the COMPAS score when changing race to African-American (from all others) and a negative (direct causal) effect when transitioning from young to old age.
• Score: 50.88100567472179
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The wide adoption of AI decision-making systems in critical domains such as criminal justice, loan approval, and hiring processes has heightened concerns about algorithmic fairness. As we often only have access to the output of algorithms without insights into their internal mechanisms, it was natural to examine how decisions would alter when auxiliary sensitive attributes (such as race) change. This led the research community to come up with counterfactual fairness measures, but how to evaluate the measure from available data remains a challenging task. In many practical applications, the target counterfactual measure is not identifiable, i.e., it cannot be uniquely determined from the combination of quantitative data and qualitative knowledge. This paper addresses this challenge using partial identification, which derives informative bounds over counterfactual fairness measures from observational data. We introduce a Bayesian approach to bound unknown counterfactual fairness measures with high confidence. We demonstrate our algorithm on the COMPAS dataset, examining fairness in recidivism risk scores with respect to race, age, and sex. Our results reveal a positive (spurious) effect on the COMPAS score when changing race to African-American (from all others) and a negative (direct causal) effect when transitioning from young to old age.

Related papers

• Targeted Learning for Data Fairness [52.59573714151884]
  We expand fairness inference by evaluating fairness in the data generating process itself.<n>We derive estimators demographic parity, equal opportunity, and conditional mutual information.<n>To validate our approach, we perform several simulations and apply our estimators to real data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-06T18:51:28Z)
• Peer-induced Fairness: A Causal Approach for Algorithmic Fairness Auditing [0.0]
  The European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act takes effect on 1 August 2024. High-risk AI applications must adhere to stringent transparency and fairness standards. We propose a novel framework, which combines the strengths of counterfactual fairness and peer comparison strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-05T15:35:34Z)
• What Hides behind Unfairness? Exploring Dynamics Fairness in Reinforcement Learning [52.51430732904994]
  In reinforcement learning problems, agents must consider long-term fairness while maximizing returns. Recent works have proposed many different types of fairness notions, but how unfairness arises in RL problems remains unclear. We introduce a novel notion called dynamics fairness, which explicitly captures the inequality stemming from environmental dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T22:47:59Z)
• Auditing Fairness under Unobserved Confounding [56.61738581796362]
  We show that, surprisingly, one can still compute meaningful bounds on treatment rates for high-risk individuals.<n>We use the fact that in many real-world settings we have data from prior to any allocation to derive unbiased estimates of risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T21:09:06Z)
• Counterpart Fairness -- Addressing Systematic between-group Differences in Fairness Evaluation [17.495053606192375]
  When using machine learning to aid decision-making, it is critical to ensure that an algorithmic decision is fair and does not discriminate against specific individuals/groups. Existing group fairness methods aim to ensure equal outcomes across groups delineated by protected variables like race or gender. In cases where systematic differences between groups play a significant role in outcomes, these methods may overlook the influence of non-protected variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T15:41:12Z)
• D-BIAS: A Causality-Based Human-in-the-Loop System for Tackling Algorithmic Bias [57.87117733071416]
  We propose D-BIAS, a visual interactive tool that embodies human-in-the-loop AI approach for auditing and mitigating social biases. A user can detect the presence of bias against a group by identifying unfair causal relationships in the causal network. For each interaction, say weakening/deleting a biased causal edge, the system uses a novel method to simulate a new (debiased) dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-10T03:41:48Z)
• Understanding Unfairness in Fraud Detection through Model and Data Bias Interactions [4.159343412286401]
  We argue that algorithmic unfairness stems from interactions between models and biases in the data. We study a set of hypotheses regarding the fairness-accuracy trade-offs that fairness-blind ML algorithms exhibit under different data bias settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-13T15:18:30Z)
• Demographic-Reliant Algorithmic Fairness: Characterizing the Risks of Demographic Data Collection in the Pursuit of Fairness [0.0]
  We consider calls to collect more data on demographics to enable algorithmic fairness. We show how these techniques largely ignore broader questions of data governance and systemic oppression.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-18T04:50:09Z)
• Evaluating Proposed Fairness Models for Face Recognition Algorithms [0.0]
  This paper characterizes two proposed measures of face recognition algorithm fairness (fairness measures) from scientists in the U.S. and Europe. We propose a set of interpretability criteria, termed the Functional Fairness Measure Criteria (FFMC), that outlines a set of properties desirable in a face recognition algorithm fairness measure. We believe this is currently the largest open-source dataset of its kind.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-09T21:16:43Z)
• Understanding Relations Between Perception of Fairness and Trust in Algorithmic Decision Making [8.795591344648294]
  We aim to understand the relationship between induced algorithmic fairness and its perception in humans. We also study how does induced algorithmic fairness affects user trust in algorithmic decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-29T11:00:39Z)
• 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)

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.