Is Fairness Truly Fair? Towards Reliable Lipschitz Fairness in Multi-Task Learning via Fixed-\texorpdfstring{$δ$}{delta} Alignment
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.10632v1
- Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2026 09:36:54 GMT
- Title: Is Fairness Truly Fair? Towards Reliable Lipschitz Fairness in Multi-Task Learning via Fixed-\texorpdfstring{$δ$}{delta} Alignment
- Abstract summary: Lipschitz-style individual fairness formalizes the idea that semantically similar examples should receive similar predictions.<n>This paper identifies threshold confounding: when the auditing tolerance is derived from each model's own representation distances, different algorithms are compared under different semantic thresholds.<n>We propose textbfReLiF, a reliability-aware framework that separates evaluation-time fixed-$$ auditing from training-time controlled regularization.
- Score: 0.32792728203318305
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Lipschitz-style individual fairness formalizes the idea that semantically similar examples should receive similar predictions, but its evaluation in multi-task learning (MTL) can be confounded by method-induced representation scales. This paper identifies threshold confounding: when the auditing tolerance is derived from each model's own representation distances, different algorithms are compared under different semantic thresholds. A threshold-drift analysis further shows how Bias rankings can change and identifies sufficient conditions for ranking preservation. We propose \textbf{ReLiF}, a reliability-aware framework that separates evaluation-time fixed-$δ$ auditing from training-time controlled regularization. ReLiF uses a shared reference tolerance for comparable auditing and a violation-rate feedback controller to keep the Lipschitz surrogate active without letting it dominate stochastic training. This work also develops supporting analysis for threshold drift, reference-tolerance selection, and the relationship between the huberized training surrogate and its unsmoothed positive-margin counterpart. Experiments on clinical time-series benchmarks and NYUv2 (NYU Depth V2) dense prediction show that fixed-$δ$ auditing exposes utility--fairness trade-offs that method-dependent thresholds can obscure. On NYUv2 with a ResNet50 backbone, ReLiF achieves competitive utility while substantially reducing aligned bias under shared fixed thresholds. On clinical benchmarks, ReLiF yields controlled fairness-regularized trade-offs, while fixed-$δ$ auditing reveals that task-balancing baselines can sometimes achieve lower bias and that genuine utility--fairness trade-offs persist. These results support fixed-$δ$ auditing as a semantically consistent protocol for evaluating Lipschitz fairness in MTL.
Related papers
- RecurSE: Bounded Recursive Self-Evaluation for LLM Rubric Judges [48.831446371402414]
RecurSE pairs a trainable judge with a synchronized policy-copy checker that audits the judge's reasoning against meta-rubrics to supply a scalar process reward.<n>We show that RecurSE achieves consistent generalization gains across held-out medical, pairwise, summarization, and professional benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-25T08:35:04Z) - FACT-E: Causality-Inspired Evaluation for Trustworthy Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [49.65751420291115]
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has improved LLM reasoning, but models often generate explanations that appear coherent while containing unfaithful intermediate steps.<n>We propose FACT-E, a causality-inspired framework for evaluating CoT quality.<n>We show that FACT-E improves reasoning-trajectory selection and yields stronger in-context learnings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-12T15:35:08Z) - Learning from N-Tuple Data with M Positive Instances: Unbiased Risk Estimation and Theoretical Guarantees [33.15955234458642]
Weakly supervised learning often operates with coarse aggregate signals rather than labels.<n>We show that counts admit a trainable unbiased risk estimator (URE) by linking the instance-generation process to latent marginals.<n>We demonstrate that count-only supervision can be exploited effectively through a theoretically grounded and practically stable objective setting.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-21T08:28:07Z) - Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable yet Noisy Rewards under Imperfect Verifiers [90.50039419576807]
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) trains policies against automated verifiers to avoid costly human labeling.<n>To reduce vulnerability to verifier hacking, many RLVR systems collapse rewards to binary $0,1$ during training.<n>This choice carries a cost: it introduces textitfalse negatives (rejecting correct answers, FNs) and textitfalse positives (accepting incorrect ones, FPs)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-01T13:56:44Z) - From Fragile to Certified: Wasserstein Audits of Group Fairness Under Distribution Shift [21.387312729118364]
Group-fairness metrics can vary sharply across resamples and are especially brittle under distribution shift.<n>We propose a Wasserstein distributionally robust framework that certifies worst-case group fairness over a ball of plausible test distributions centered at the empirical law.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-30T13:35:50Z) - Reference-Free Rating of LLM Responses via Latent Information [53.463883683503106]
We study the common practice of asking a judge model to assign Likert-scale scores to free-text responses.<n>We then propose and evaluate Latent Judges, which derive scalar ratings from internal model signals.<n>Across a broad suite of pairwise and single-rating benchmarks, latent methods match or surpass standard prompting.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-29T12:15:52Z) - TrustJudge: Inconsistencies of LLM-as-a-Judge and How to Alleviate Them [58.04324690859212]
Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated evaluators (LLM-as-a-judge) has revealed critical inconsistencies in current evaluation frameworks.<n>We identify two fundamental types of inconsistencies: Score-Comparison Inconsistency and Pairwise Transitivity Inconsistency.<n>We propose TrustJudge, a probabilistic framework that addresses these limitations through two key innovations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-25T13:04:29Z) - Noisy Correspondence Learning with Self-Reinforcing Errors Mitigation [63.180725016463974]
Cross-modal retrieval relies on well-matched large-scale datasets that are laborious in practice.
We introduce a novel noisy correspondence learning framework, namely textbfSelf-textbfReinforcing textbfErrors textbfMitigation (SREM)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-27T09:03:43Z) - Measuring Model Fairness under Noisy Covariates: A Theoretical
Perspective [26.704446184314506]
We study the problem of measuring the fairness of a machine learning model under noisy information.
We present a theoretical analysis that aims to characterize weaker conditions under which accurate fairness evaluation is possible.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-20T18:36:28Z)
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.