Variable Selection in the Context of AI Fairness
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.11251v1
- Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2026 20:36:18 GMT
- Title: Variable Selection in the Context of AI Fairness
- Abstract summary: We discuss a mathematical approach that evaluates fairness in AI, aligning mathematical methodologies with ethical considerations and regulatory requirements.<n>Our aim is to advocate for interdisciplinary collaboration to address fairness, emphasizing the importance of understanding broader ethical and societal contexts.<n>This work underscores the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration in effectively addressing fairness in AI systems aligned with the objectives of the European Union's AI Act.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Fairness in AI systems has become more important with recent regulatory demands, such as the EU AI Act. Traditional approaches often do not take into account philosophical ethics and social awareness. Variable selection processes, in particular, can introduce implicit bias, affecting equity across different subgroups. We discuss a mathematical approach that evaluates fairness in AI, aligning mathematical methodologies with ethical considerations and regulatory requirements. Our aim is to advocate for interdisciplinary collaboration to address fairness, emphasizing the importance of understanding broader ethical and societal contexts. Our approach emphasizes maintaining all potentially relevant variables to allow for more granular fairness assessments and to reduce implicit bias. The findings suggest that the exclusion of sensitive or critical variables may compromise equity between subgroups. In contrast, retaining all relevant variables could reduce implicit bias. Thus, the interdisciplinary approach could provide deeper insight into the ethical implications and compliance with regulatory standards. By integrating a mathematical approach with ethical and social awareness, we suggest more equitable outcomes and responsible AI deployment. This work underscores the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration in effectively addressing fairness in AI systems aligned with the objectives of the European Union's AI Act, which seeks to promote trustworthy and fair AI systems.
Related papers
- Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution [80.98492754957466]
Core trustworthy AI objectives, such as fairness, robustness, privacy, and explainability, are hard to achieve simultaneously.<n>This paper argues that causality is necessary to understand and balance trade-offs in performance and multiple objectives of trustworthy AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-04T14:26:28Z) - Mirror: A Multi-Agent System for AI-Assisted Ethics Review [104.3684024153469]
Mirror is an agentic framework for AI-assisted ethical review.<n>It integrates ethical reasoning, structured rule interpretation, and multi-agent deliberation within a unified architecture.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-09T03:38:55Z) - A Gray Literature Study on Fairness Requirements in AI-enabled Software Engineering [3.5429774642987915]
This paper presents a review of existing gray literature, examining fairness requirements in AI context.<n>Our gray literature investigation shows various definitions of fairness requirements in AI systems.<n>Fairness requirement violations are frequently linked, but not limited, to data representation bias, algorithmic and model design bias, human judgment, and evaluation and transparency gaps.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-08T19:22:01Z) - A Unifying Human-Centered AI Fairness Framework [2.9385229328767988]
We introduce a unifying human-centered fairness framework that covers eight distinct fairness metrics.<n>Rather than privileging a single fairness notion, the framework enables stakeholders to assign weights across multiple fairness objectives.<n>We show that adjusting weights reveals nuanced trade-offs between different fairness metrics.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-07T17:52:38Z) - Ethical AI: Towards Defining a Collective Evaluation Framework [0.3413711585591077]
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming sectors such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous systems.<n>Yet its rapid integration raises urgent ethical concerns related to data ownership, privacy, and systemic bias.<n>This article proposes a modular ethical assessment framework built on ontological blocks of meaning-discrete, interpretable units.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-30T21:10:47Z) - Achieving Socio-Economic Parity through the Lens of EU AI Act [11.550643687258738]
Unfair treatment and discrimination are critical ethical concerns in AI systems.<n>The recent introduction of the EU AI Act establishes a unified legal framework to ensure legal certainty for AI innovation and investment.<n>We propose a novel fairness notion, Socio-Economic Parity (SEP), which incorporates Socio-Economic Status (SES) and promotes positive actions for underprivileged groups.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-29T12:27:27Z) - Technology as uncharted territory: Contextual integrity and the notion of AI as new ethical ground [51.85131234265026]
I argue that efforts to promote responsible and ethical AI can inadvertently contribute to and seemingly legitimize this disregard for established contextual norms.<n>I question the current narrow prioritization in AI ethics of moral innovation over moral preservation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-06T15:36:13Z) - Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair
Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
"Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture.
This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias.
In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z) - AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Survey [69.61425542486275]
AI alignment aims to make AI systems behave in line with human intentions and values.<n>We identify four principles as the key objectives of AI alignment: Robustness, Interpretability, Controllability, and Ethicality.<n>We decompose current alignment research into two key components: forward alignment and backward alignment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-30T15:52:15Z) - Fairness And Bias in Artificial Intelligence: A Brief Survey of Sources,
Impacts, And Mitigation Strategies [11.323961700172175]
This survey paper offers a succinct, comprehensive overview of fairness and bias in AI.
We review sources of bias, such as data, algorithm, and human decision biases.
We assess the societal impact of biased AI systems, focusing on the perpetuation of inequalities and the reinforcement of harmful stereotypes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-16T03:23:55Z) - Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary
Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them.
We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives.
We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z) - Metaethical Perspectives on 'Benchmarking' AI Ethics [81.65697003067841]
Benchmarks are seen as the cornerstone for measuring technical progress in Artificial Intelligence (AI) research.
An increasingly prominent research area in AI is ethics, which currently has no set of benchmarks nor commonly accepted way for measuring the 'ethicality' of an AI system.
We argue that it makes more sense to talk about 'values' rather than 'ethics' when considering the possible actions of present and future AI systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-11T14:36:39Z)
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.