On the use of graph models to achieve individual and group fairness

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.08784v1
• Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 18:17:43 GMT
• Title: On the use of graph models to achieve individual and group fairness
• Authors: Arturo Pérez-Peralta, Sandra Benítez-Peña, Rosa E. Lillo,
• Abstract summary: We provide a theoretical framework based on Sheaf Diffusion to leverage tools based on dynamical systems and homology to model fairness.<n>We present a collection of network topologies handling different fairness metrics, leading to a unified method capable of dealing with both individual and group bias.<n>The paper showcases the performance of the proposed models in terms of accuracy and fairness.
• Score: 0.6299766708197883
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Machine Learning algorithms are ubiquitous in key decision-making contexts such as justice, healthcare and finance, which has spawned a great demand for fairness in these procedures. However, the theoretical properties of such models in relation with fairness are still poorly understood, and the intuition behind the relationship between group and individual fairness is still lacking. In this paper, we provide a theoretical framework based on Sheaf Diffusion to leverage tools based on dynamical systems and homology to model fairness. Concretely, the proposed method projects input data into a bias-free space that encodes fairness constrains, resulting in fair solutions. Furthermore, we present a collection of network topologies handling different fairness metrics, leading to a unified method capable of dealing with both individual and group bias. The resulting models have a layer of interpretability in the form of closed-form expressions for their SHAP values, consolidating their place in the responsible Artificial Intelligence landscape. Finally, these intuitions are tested on a simulation study and standard fairness benchmarks, where the proposed methods achieve satisfactory results. More concretely, the paper showcases the performance of the proposed models in terms of accuracy and fairness, studying available trade-offs on the Pareto frontier, checking the effects of changing the different hyper-parameters, and delving into the interpretation of its outputs.

Related papers

• Enhancing Model Fairness and Accuracy with Similarity Networks: A Methodological Approach [0.20718016474717196]
  We use different techniques to map instances into a similarity feature space. Our method's ability to adjust the resolution of pairwise similarity provides clear insights into the relationship between the dataset classification complexity and model fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-08T15:43:01Z)
• Fair Bilevel Neural Network (FairBiNN): On Balancing fairness and accuracy via Stackelberg Equilibrium [0.3350491650545292]
  Current methods for mitigating bias often result in information loss and an inadequate balance between accuracy and fairness. We propose a novel methodology grounded in bilevel optimization principles. Our deep learning-based approach concurrently optimize for both accuracy and fairness objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T18:53:39Z)
• 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)
• Chasing Fairness Under Distribution Shift: A Model Weight Perturbation Approach [72.19525160912943]
  We first theoretically demonstrate the inherent connection between distribution shift, data perturbation, and model weight perturbation. We then analyze the sufficient conditions to guarantee fairness for the target dataset. Motivated by these sufficient conditions, we propose robust fairness regularization (RFR)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-06T17:19:23Z)
• Fairness Increases Adversarial Vulnerability [50.90773979394264]
  This paper shows the existence of a dichotomy between fairness and robustness, and analyzes when achieving fairness decreases the model robustness to adversarial samples. Experiments on non-linear models and different architectures validate the theoretical findings in multiple vision domains. The paper proposes a simple, yet effective, solution to construct models achieving good tradeoffs between fairness and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-21T19:55:35Z)
• FairIF: Boosting Fairness in Deep Learning via Influence Functions with Validation Set Sensitive Attributes [51.02407217197623]
  We propose a two-stage training algorithm named FAIRIF. It minimizes the loss over the reweighted data set where the sample weights are computed. We show that FAIRIF yields models with better fairness-utility trade-offs against various types of bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-15T05:14:48Z)
• Beyond Individual and Group Fairness [90.4666341812857]
  We present a new data-driven model of fairness that is guided by the unfairness complaints received by the system. Our model supports multiple fairness criteria and takes into account their potential incompatibilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-21T14:14:44Z)
• Towards Threshold Invariant Fair Classification [10.317169065327546]
  This paper introduces the notion of threshold invariant fairness, which enforces equitable performances across different groups independent of the decision threshold. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed methodology is effective to alleviate the threshold sensitivity in machine learning models designed to achieve fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-18T16:49:46Z)
• Causal Feature Selection for Algorithmic Fairness [61.767399505764736]
  We consider fairness in the integration component of data management. We propose an approach to identify a sub-collection of features that ensure the fairness of the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-10T20:20:10Z)
• Fairness by Explicability and Adversarial SHAP Learning [0.0]
  We propose a new definition of fairness that emphasises the role of an external auditor and model explicability. We develop a framework for mitigating model bias using regularizations constructed from the SHAP values of an adversarial surrogate model. We demonstrate our approaches using gradient and adaptive boosting on: a synthetic dataset, the UCI Adult (Census) dataset and a real-world credit scoring dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-11T14:36:34Z)

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.