Price of Fairness in Short-Term and Long-Term Algorithmic Selections

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06227v1
• Date: Thu, 07 May 2026 13:20:15 GMT
• Title: Price of Fairness in Short-Term and Long-Term Algorithmic Selections
• Abstract summary: We study a stylized sequential selection problem in which a decision-maker repeatedly selects individuals.<n>Motivated by this tension, we study the trade-off between fairness and utility via the Price of Fairness.<n>We show that long-term disparities can vanish under simple investment policies that achieve a low PoF.
• Score: 3.9009255766901116
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Algorithmic decision-making in high-stakes settings can have profound impacts on individuals and populations. While much prior work studies fairness in static settings, recent results show that enforcing static fairness constraints may exacerbate long-run disparities. Motivated by this tension, we study a stylized sequential selection problem in which a decision-maker repeatedly selects individuals, affecting both immediate utility and the population distribution over time. We introduce notions of group fairness for both the short and long term and theoretically analyze the trade-off between fairness and utility via the Price of Fairness (PoF). We characterize optimal and fair policies in the short term and show that the PoF can be large even when group distributions are nearly identical. In contrast, we show that long-term disparities can vanish under simple investment policies that achieve a low PoF. We also empirically validate these theoretical observations using both synthetic and real datasets.

Related papers

• Post-hoc Provider Fairness Adaptation via Hierarchical Exposure Alignment [54.58748721533078]
  Post-hoc Fairness Adaptation (PFA) is a lightweight framework that equips a frozen recommender with a fairness adapter.<n>It learns personalized additive score adjustments from user-item embeddings to steer provider exposure toward fairness.<n>PFA achieves substantial fairness gains with negligible accuracy loss, consistently outperforming strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-02T16:32:52Z)
• The Statistical Fairness-Accuracy Frontier [50.323024516295725]
  Machine learning models must balance accuracy and fairness, but these goals often conflict.<n>A useful tool for understanding this trade-off is the fairness-accuracy frontier, which characterizes the set of models that cannot be simultaneously improved in both fairness and accuracy.<n>We study the FA frontier in the finite-sample regime, showing how it deviates from its population counterpart and quantifying the worst-case gap between them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-25T03:01:35Z)
• A Causal Lens for Learning Long-term Fair Policies [3.2233767737586674]
  This paper highlights the importance of investigating long-term fairness in dynamic decision-making systems.<n>We propose a general framework where long-term fairness is measured by the difference in the average expected qualification gain.<n>We analyze the intrinsic connection between these components and an emerging fairness notion called benefit fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-12T19:22:50Z)
• Fairness-Accuracy Trade-Offs: A Causal Perspective [58.06306331390586]
  We analyze the tension between fairness and accuracy from a causal lens for the first time.<n>We show that enforcing a causal constraint often reduces the disparity between demographic groups.<n>We introduce a new neural approach for causally-constrained fair learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T11:19:52Z)
• Assessing Group Fairness with Social Welfare Optimization [0.9217021281095907]
  This paper explores whether a broader conception of social justice, based on optimizing a social welfare function, can be useful for assessing various definitions of parity. We show that it can justify demographic parity or equalized odds under certain conditions, but frequently requires a departure from these types of parity. In addition, we find that predictive rate parity is of limited usefulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-19T01:41:04Z)
• Adapting Static Fairness to Sequential Decision-Making: Bias Mitigation Strategies towards Equal Long-term Benefit Rate [41.51680686036846]
  We introduce a long-term fairness concept named Equal Long-term Benefit Rate (ELBERT) to address biases in sequential decision-making. ELBERT effectively addresses the temporal discrimination issues found in previous long-term fairness notions. We show that ELBERT-PO significantly diminishes bias while maintaining high utility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-07T01:10:01Z)
• Learning Informative Representation for Fairness-aware Multivariate Time-series Forecasting: A Group-based Perspective [50.093280002375984]
  Performance unfairness among variables widely exists in multivariate time series (MTS) forecasting models. We propose a novel framework, named FairFor, for fairness-aware MTS forecasting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-27T04:54:12Z)
• Enforcing Delayed-Impact Fairness Guarantees [21.368958668652652]
  We introduce ELF, the first classification algorithm that provides high-confidence fairness guarantees in terms of long-term, or delayed, impact. We show experimentally that our algorithm can successfully mitigate long-term unfairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-24T19:14:56Z)
• How Robust is Your Fairness? Evaluating and Sustaining Fairness under Unseen Distribution Shifts [107.72786199113183]
  We propose a novel fairness learning method termed CUrvature MAtching (CUMA) CUMA achieves robust fairness generalizable to unseen domains with unknown distributional shifts. We evaluate our method on three popular fairness datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-04T02:37:50Z)
• Multi-Stage Decentralized Matching Markets: Uncertain Preferences and Strategic Behaviors [91.3755431537592]
  This article develops a framework for learning optimal strategies in real-world matching markets. We show that there exists a welfare-versus-fairness trade-off that is characterized by the uncertainty level of acceptance. We prove that participants can be better off with multi-stage matching compared to single-stage matching.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-13T19:25:52Z)
• Fast Fair Regression via Efficient Approximations of Mutual Information [0.0]
  This paper introduces fast approximations of the independence, separation and sufficiency group fairness criteria for regression models. It uses such approximations as regularisers to enforce fairness within a regularised risk minimisation framework. Experiments in real-world datasets indicate that in spite of its superior computational efficiency our algorithm still displays state-of-the-art accuracy/fairness tradeoffs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-14T08:50:51Z)

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.