Many instances of algorithmic bias are caused by distributional shifts. For example, machine learning (ML) models often perform worse on demographic groups that are underrepresented in the training data. In this paper, we leverage this connection between algorithmic fairness and distribution shifts to show that algorithmic fairness interventions can help ML models overcome distribution shifts, and that domain adaptation methods (for overcoming distribution shifts) can mitigate algorithmic biases. In particular, we show that (i) enforcing suitable notions of individual fairness (IF) can improve the out-of-distribution accuracy of ML models under the covariate shift assumption and that (ii) it is possible to adapt representation alignment methods for domain adaptation to enforce individual fairness. The former is unexpected because IF interventions were not developed with distribution shifts in mind. The latter is also unexpected because representation alignment is not a common approach in the individual fairness literature.

Domain adaptation generally refers to the problem of semi-supervised learning under distribution shift.

Many instances of algorithmic bias are caused by distributional shifts.

The main appeal of post-processing is that it avoids expensive retraining.

These sets reflect the model's confidence

This paper presents a framework for provably fair AI that overcomes the limits of current bias mitigation methods by systematically removing all sensitive information and its proxies. Using ontology engineering in OWL 2 QL, it formally defines sensitive attributes and infers their proxies through logical reasoning, constructing a sigma algebra G that captures the full structure of biased patterns. Fair representations are then obtained via Delbaen Majumdar optimal transport, which generates variables independent of G while minimizing L2 distance to preserve accuracy. This guarantees true independence rather than mere decorrelation. By modeling bias as dependence between sigma algebras, compiling ontological knowledge into measurable structures, and using optimal transport as the unique fair transformation, the approach ensures complete fairness in tasks like loan approval, where proxies such as ZIP code reveal race. The result is a certifiable and mathematically grounded method for trustworthy AI.

With the advance of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained prominence and been applied in diverse contexts. As they evolve into more sophisticated versions, it is essential to assess whether they reproduce biases, such as discrimination and racialization, while maintaining hegemonic discourses. Current bias detection approaches rely mostly on quantitative, automated methods, which often overlook the nuanced ways in which biases emerge in natural language. This study proposes a qualitative, discursive framework to complement such methods. Through manual analysis of LLM-generated short stories featuring Black and white women, we investigate gender and racial biases. We contend that qualitative methods such as the one proposed here are fundamental to help both developers and users identify the precise ways in which biases manifest in LLM outputs, thus enabling better conditions to mitigate them. Results show that Black women are portrayed as tied to ancestry and resistance, while white women appear in self-discovery processes. These patterns reflect how language models replicate crystalized discursive representations, reinforcing essentialization and a sense of social immobility. When prompted to correct biases, models offered superficial revisions that maintained problematic meanings, revealing limitations in fostering inclusive narratives. Our results demonstrate the ideological functioning of algorithms and have significant implications for the ethical use and development of AI. The study reinforces the need for critical, interdisciplinary approaches to AI design and deployment, addressing how LLM-generated discourses reflect and perpetuate inequalities.