We then quantify epistemic discrimination as the gap between a model's accuracy when fairness constraints are

We then quantify epistemic discrimination as the gap between a model's accuracy when fairness constraints are

Graph Contrastive Learning (GCL) has emerged as a powerful approach for generating graph representations without the need for manual annotation. Most advanced GCL methods fall into three main frameworks: node discrimination, group discrimination, and bootstrapping schemes, all of which achieve comparable performance. However, the underlying mechanisms and factors that contribute to their effectiveness are not yet fully understood. In this paper, we revisit these frameworks and reveal a common mechanism--representation scattering--that significantly enhances their performance. Our discovery highlights an essential feature of GCL and unifies these seemingly disparate methods under the concept of representation scattering. To leverage this insight, we introduce Scattering Graph Representation Learning (SGRL), a novel framework that incorporates a new representation scattering mechanism designed to enhance representation diversity through a center-away strategy. Additionally, consider the interconnected nature of graphs, we develop a topology-based constraint mechanism that integrates graph structural properties with representation scattering to prevent excessive scattering. We extensively evaluate SGRL across various downstream tasks on benchmark datasets, demonstrating its efficacy and superiority over existing GCL methods. Our findings underscore the significance of representation scattering in GCL and provide a structured framework for harnessing this mechanism to advance graph representation learning.

The Equalized Odds (for short, EO) is one of the most popular measures of discrimination used in the supervised learning setting. It ascertains fairness through the balance of the misclassification rates (false positive and negative) across the protected groups -- e.g., in the context of law enforcement, an African-American defendant who would not commit a future crime will have an equal opportunity of being released, compared to a non-recidivating Caucasian defendant. Despite this noble goal, it has been acknowledged in the literature that statistical tests based on the EO are oblivious to the underlying causal mechanisms that generated the disparity in the first place (Hardt et al. 2016). This leads to a critical disconnect between statistical measures readable from the data and the meaning of discrimination in the legal system, where compelling evidence that the observed disparity is tied to a specific causal process deemed unfair by society is required to characterize discrimination. The goal of this paper is to develop a principled approach to connect the statistical disparities characterized by the EO and the underlying, elusive, and frequently unobserved, causal mechanisms that generated such inequality. We start by introducing a new family of counterfactual measures that allows one to explain the misclassification disparities in terms of the underlying mechanisms in an arbitrary, non-parametric structural causal model. This will, in turn, allow legal and data analysts to interpret currently deployed classifiers through causal lens, linking the statistical disparities found in the data to the corresponding causal processes. Leveraging the new family of counterfactual measures, we develop a learning procedure to construct a classifier that is statistically efficient, interpretable, and compatible with the basic human intuition of fairness. We demonstrate our results through experiments in both real (COMPAS) and synthetic datasets.

Machine learning (ML) models can underperform on certain population groups due to choices made during model development and bias inherent in the data. We categorize sources of discrimination in the ML pipeline into two classes: aleatoric discrimination, which is inherent in the data distribution, and epistemic discrimination, which is due to decisions made during model development. We quantify aleatoric discrimination by determining the performance limits of a model under fairness constraints, assuming perfect knowledge of the data distribution. We demonstrate how to characterize aleatoric discrimination by applying Blackwell's results on comparing statistical experiments. We then quantify epistemic discrimination as the gap between a model's accuracy when fairness constraints are applied and the limit posed by aleatoric discrimination. We apply this approach to benchmark existing fairness interventions and investigate fairness risks in data with missing values. Our results indicate that state-of-the-art fairness interventions are effective at removing epistemic discrimination on standard (overused) tabular datasets. However, when data has missing values, there is still significant room for improvement in handling aleatoric discrimination.

In recent years Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) were successfully used to model the way neural activity drives task-related behavior in animals, operating under the implicit assumption that the obtained solutions are universal.

Existing bias mitigation methods for DNN models primarily work on learning debiased encoders. This process not only requires a lot of instance-level annotations for sensitive attributes, it also does not guarantee that all fairness sensitive information has been removed from the encoder. To address these limitations, we explore the following research question: Can we reduce the discrimination of DNN models by only debiasing the classification head, even with biased representations as inputs? To this end, we propose a new mitigation technique, namely, Representation Neutralization for Fairness (RNF) that achieves fairness by debiasing only the task-specific classification head of DNN models. To this end, we leverage samples with the same ground-truth label but different sensitive attributes, and use their neutralized representations to train the classification head of the DNN model. The key idea of RNF is to discourage the classification head from capturing spurious correlation between fairness sensitive information in encoder representations with specific class labels. To address low-resource settings with no access to sensitive attribute annotations, we leverage a bias-amplified model to generate proxy annotations for sensitive attributes. Experimental results over several benchmark datasets demonstrate our RNF framework to effectively reduce discrimination of DNN models with minimal degradation in task-specific performance.

Contrastive learning (CL) pretrains feature embeddings to scatter instances in the feature space so that the training data can be well discriminated. Most existing CL techniques usually encourage learning such feature embeddings in the highdimensional space to maximize the instance discrimination. However, this practice may lead to undesired results where the scattering instances are sparsely distributed in the high-dimensional feature space, making it difficult to capture the underlying similarity between pairwise instances. To this end, we propose a novel framework called contrastive learning with low-dimensional reconstruction (CLLR), which adopts a regularized projection layer to reduce the dimensionality of the feature embedding. In CLLR, we build the sparse / low-rank regularizer to adaptively reconstruct a low-dimensional projection space while preserving the basic objective for instance discrimination, and thus successfully learning contrastive embeddings that alleviate the above issue. Theoretically, we prove a tighter error bound for CLLR; empirically, the superiority of CLLR is demonstrated across multiple domains. Both theoretical and experimental results emphasize the significance of learning low-dimensional contrastive embeddings.

Unsupervised domain adaptation aims to align a labeled source domain and an unlabeled target domain, but it requires to access the source data which often raises concerns in data privacy, data portability and data transmission efficiency. We study unsupervised model adaptation (UMA), or called Unsupervised Domain Adaptation without Source Data, an alternative setting that aims to adapt source-trained models towards target distributions without accessing source data. To this end, we design an innovative historical contrastive learning (HCL) technique that exploits historical source hypothesis to make up for the absence of source data in UMA. HCL addresses the UMA challenge from two perspectives. First, it introduces historical contrastive instance discrimination (HCID) that learns from target samples by contrasting their embeddings which are generated by the currently adapted model and the historical models. With the historical models, HCID encourages UMA to learn instance-discriminative target representations while preserving the source hypothesis. Second, it introduces historical contrastive category discrimination (HCCD) that pseudo-labels target samples to learn category-discriminative target representations.

Things to Do in L.A. Tap to enable a layout that focuses on the article. Times Investigation: Ex-Trump DOJ lawyers say'fraudulent' UC antisemitism probes led them to quit This is read by an automated voice. Please report any issues or inconsistencies here . Nine former DOJ attorneys investigating UC antisemitism told The Times they felt pressured to conclude that campuses had violated the civil rights of Jewish students and staff. The attorneys resigned during the course of their UC assignments, some concerned that they were being asked to violate ethical standards. UC says it is open to talks with the Trump administration to protect $17.5 billion in federal funding.