When Interpretability Is Unequally Distributed: Fairness in Hybrid Interpretable Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.28626v1
• Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 15:33:00 GMT
• Title: When Interpretability Is Unequally Distributed: Fairness in Hybrid Interpretable Models
• Abstract summary: Hybrid interpretable models combine a transparent component with a black-box model by assigning some examples to the former and deferring the rest to the latter.<n>Some demographic groups may systematically receive interpretable decisions, while others are disproportionately routed to a black box.<n>We formalize this issue as Interpretability Coverage Disparity (ICD), a demographic-parity-style measure applied to the routing decision of hybrid interpretable models.
• Score: 7.412725493312841
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Hybrid interpretable models combine a transparent component with a black-box model by assigning some examples to the former and deferring the rest to the latter. While this design enables flexible tradeoffs between accuracy and interpretability, it also raises a distinct procedural fairness concern: some demographic groups may systematically receive interpretable decisions, while others are disproportionately routed to a black box. We formalize this issue as Interpretability Coverage Disparity (ICD), a demographic-parity-style measure applied to the routing decision of hybrid interpretable models. Using tools from predictive multiplicity, we study ICD across four hybrid interpretable learning methods, three standard fairness benchmark datasets, and multiple sensitive attributes. Our experiments reveal substantial ICD in intermediate transparency regimes, where both the interpretable and black-box components are actively used. We further show that simple coverage-disparity constraints can significantly reduce ICD in exact hybrid learning methods, with marginal impact on accuracy and sparsity. In several settings, ICD mitigation also improves standard algorithmic fairness metrics. These results show that hybrid interpretable models should be audited not only for predictive fairness, but also for how they allocate interpretability across individuals and groups.

Related papers

• Dual-Branch Cross-Projection Debiasing through Diffusion-based Disentanglement [66.67463557274358]
  Foundation models trained on biased datasets often rely on spurious correlations between target labels and non-causal attributes.<n>We introduce Confidence-guided Concept Mining (CBCM) to identify reliable spurious attributes without attribute annotations.<n>We propose Dual-branch Cross-projection Debiasing (DCD), a prompt-tuning framework that separates target and spurious representations into two branches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-23T05:28:47Z)
• VAE-Inf: A statistically interpretable generative paradigm for imbalanced classification [8.677199689027772]
  We propose a two-stage framework to bridge the gap between generative modeling and discriminative classification.<n>For inference, we introduce a projection-based score that admits a natural hypothesis testing interpretation.<n>Experiments on diverse real-world benchmarks demonstrate that our framework achieves competitive performance against other approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-28T07:50:56Z)
• MBD: A Model-Based Debiasing Framework Across User, Content, and Model Dimensions [50.00784452900918]
  We propose a general, model-based debiasing (MBD) framework that addresses this challenge.<n>We explicitly estimate the contextual mean and variance of the engagement distribution for arbitrary cohorts.<n>This integration allows the framework to convert biased raw signals into unbiased representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-15T15:07:01Z)
• CDRRM: Contrast-Driven Rubric Generation for Reliable and Interpretable Reward Modeling [61.75914342638658]
  CDRRM (Contrast-Driven Reward Model) is a framework for high-quality rubric generation and guided preference judgment.<n>This work offers a scalable, interpretable, and data-efficient path for reward modeling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T07:15:23Z)
• On the use of graph models to achieve individual and group fairness [0.6299766708197883]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-13T18:17:43Z)
• Towards Fair In-Context Learning with Tabular Foundation Models [6.4989916051093815]
  We present the first investigation of fairness in Transformer-based in-context learning (ICL)<n>We evaluate three recently proposed foundation models -- TabPFNv2, TabICL, and TabDPT -- on benchmark datasets.<n>Our experiments show that the uncertainty-based strategy consistently improves group fairness metrics with minimal impact on predictive accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-14T15:53:14Z)
• Towards Cohesion-Fairness Harmony: Contrastive Regularization in Individual Fair Graph Clustering [5.255750357176021]
  iFairNMTF is an individual Fairness Nonnegative Matrix Tri-Factorization model with contrastive fairness regularization. Our model allows for customizable accuracy-fairness trade-offs, thereby enhancing user autonomy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T15:25:56Z)
• 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)
• Domain Adaptation meets Individual Fairness. And they get along [48.95808607591299]
  We show that algorithmic fairness interventions can help machine learning models overcome distribution shifts. In particular, we show that enforcing suitable notions of individual fairness (IF) can improve the out-of-distribution accuracy of ML models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-01T16:19:55Z)
• Distributionally Robust Models with Parametric Likelihood Ratios [123.05074253513935]
  Three simple ideas allow us to train models with DRO using a broader class of parametric likelihood ratios. We find that models trained with the resulting parametric adversaries are consistently more robust to subpopulation shifts when compared to other DRO approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-13T12:43:12Z)

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.