Secondly, these works do not account for finite-sampling errors in the obtained curve.

Recent advancements in graph diffusion models (GDMs) have enabled the synthesis of realistic network structures, yet ensuring fairness in the generated data remains a critical challenge. Existing solutions attempt to mitigate bias by re-training the GDMs with ad-hoc fairness constraints. Conversely, with this work, we propose FAROS, a novel FAir graph geneRatiOn framework leveraging attribute Switching mechanisms and directly running in the generation process of the pre-trained GDM. Technically, our approach works by altering nodes' sensitive attributes during the generation. To this end, FAROS calculates the optimal fraction of switching nodes, and selects the diffusion step to perform the switch by setting tailored multi-criteria constraints to preserve the node-topology profile from the original distribution (a proxy for accuracy) while ensuring the edge independence on the sensitive attributes for the generated graph (a proxy for fairness). Our experiments on benchmark datasets for link prediction demonstrate that the proposed approach effectively reduces fairness discrepancies while maintaining comparable (or even higher) accuracy performance to other similar baselines. Noteworthy, FAROS is also able to strike a better accuracy-fairness trade-off than other competitors in some of the tested settings under the Pareto optimality concept, demonstrating the effectiveness of the imposed multi-criteria constraints.

Deep neural networks are prone to various bias issues, jeopardizing their applications for high-stake decision-making. Existing fairness methods typically offer a fixed accuracy-fairness trade-off, since the weight of the well-trained model is a fixed point (fairness-optimum) in the weight space. Nevertheless, more flexible accuracy-fairness trade-offs at inference time are practically desired since: 1) stakes of the same downstream task can vary for different individuals, and 2) different regions have diverse laws or regularization for fairness. If using the previous fairness methods, we have to train multiple models, each offering a specific level of accuracy-fairness trade-off. This is often computationally expensive, time-consuming, and difficult to deploy, making it less practical for real-world applications. To address this problem, we propose You Only Debias Once (YODO) to achieve in-situ flexible accuracy-fairness trade-offs at inference time, using a single model that trained only once. Instead of pursuing one individual fixed point (fairness-optimum) in the weight space, we aim to find a "line" in the weight space that connects the accuracy-optimum and fairness-optimum points using a single model. Points (models) on this line implement varying levels of accuracy-fairness trade-offs. At inference time, by manually selecting the specific position of the learned "line", our proposed method can achieve arbitrary accuracy-fairness trade-offs for different end-users and scenarios. Experimental results on tabular and image datasets show that YODO achieves flexible trade-offs between model accuracy and fairness, at ultra-low overheads. For example, if we need $100$ levels of trade-off on the \acse dataset, YODO takes $3.53$ seconds while training $100$ fixed models consumes $425$ seconds. The code is available at https://github.com/ahxt/yodo.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant strides in the field of artificial intelligence, showcasing their ability to interact with humans and influence human cognition through information dissemination. However, recent studies have brought to light instances of bias inherent within these LLMs, presenting a critical issue that demands attention. In our research, we delve deeper into the intricate challenge of harmonising accuracy and fairness in the enhancement of LLMs. While improving accuracy can indeed enhance overall LLM performance, it often occurs at the expense of fairness. Overemphasising optimisation of one metric invariably leads to a significant degradation of the other. This underscores the necessity of taking into account multiple considerations during the design and optimisation phases of LLMs. Therefore, we advocate for reformulating the LLM training process as a multi-objective learning task. Our investigation reveals that multi-objective evolutionary learning (MOEL) methodologies offer promising avenues for tackling this challenge. Our MOEL framework enables the simultaneous optimisation of both accuracy and fairness metrics, resulting in a Pareto-optimal set of LLMs. In summary, our study sheds valuable lights on the delicate equilibrium between accuracy and fairness within LLMs, which is increasingly significant for their real-world applications. By harnessing MOEL, we present a promising pathway towards fairer and more efficacious AI technologies.

One of the key challenges in fairness for machine learning is to train models that minimize the disparity across various sensitive groups such as race or gender [Caton and Haas, 2020, Ustun et al., 2019, Celis et al., 2019]. This often comes at the cost of reduced model accuracy, a phenomenon termed accuracyfairness trade-off in literature [Valdivia et al., 2021, Martinez et al., 2020]. This trade-off can differ significantly across datasets in practice, depending on factors such as dataset biases, imbalances etc. [Agarwal et al., 2018, Bendekgey and Sudderth, 2021, Celis et al., 2021]. To demonstrate how these trade-offs are inherently dataset-dependent, let's consider a simple example involving two distinct crime datasets. Dataset A has records from a community where crime rates are uniformly distributed across all racial groups, whereas Dataset B comes from a community where historical factors have resulted in a disproportionate crime rate among a specific racial group. Intuitively, training models which are racially agnostic is more challenging for Dataset B, due to the unequal distribution of crime rates across racial groups, and will result in a greater loss in model accuracy as compared to Dataset A. This example underscores that setting a uniform fairness requirement across diverse datasets (such as requiring the fairness violation metric to be below 10% for both datasets), while also adhering to essential accuracy benchmarks is impractical.

While the accuracy-fairness trade-off has been frequently observed in the literature of fair machine learning, rigorous theoretical analyses have been scarce. To demystify this long-standing challenge, this work seeks to develop a theoretical framework by characterizing the shape of the accuracy-fairness trade-off Pareto frontier (FairFrontier), determined by a set of all optimal Pareto classifiers that no other classifiers can dominate. Specifically, we first demonstrate the existence of the trade-off in real-world scenarios and then propose four potential categories to characterize the important properties of the accuracy-fairness Pareto frontier. For each category, we identify the necessary conditions that lead to corresponding trade-offs. Experimental results on synthetic data suggest insightful findings of the proposed framework: (1) When sensitive attributes can be fully interpreted by non-sensitive attributes, FairFrontier is mostly continuous. (2) Accuracy can suffer a \textit{sharp} decline when over-pursuing fairness. (3) Eliminate the trade-off via a two-step streamlined approach. The proposed research enables an in-depth understanding of the accuracy-fairness trade-off, pushing current fair machine-learning research to a new frontier.