Where machine-learned predictive risk scores inform high-stakes decisions, such as bail and sentencing in criminal justice, fairness has been a serious concern. Recent work has characterized the disparate impact that such risk scores can have when used for a binary classification task. This may not account, however, for the more diverse downstream uses of risk scores and their non-binary nature. To better account for this, in this paper, we investigate the fairness of predictive risk scores from the point of view of a bipartite ranking task, where one seeks to rank positive examples higher than negative ones. We introduce the xAUC disparity as a metric to assess the disparate impact of risk scores and define it as the difference in the probabilities of ranking a random positive example from one protected group above a negative one from another group and vice versa. We provide a decomposition of bipartite ranking loss into components that involve the discrepancy and components that involve pure predictive ability within each group. We use xAUC analysis to audit predictive risk scores for recidivism prediction, income prediction, and cardiac arrest prediction, where it describes disparities that are not evident from simply comparing within-group predictive performance.

Network pruning is a widely-used compression technique that is able to significantly scale down overparameterized models with minimal loss of accuracy. This paper shows that pruning may create or exacerbate disparate impacts. The paper sheds light on the factors to cause such disparities, suggesting differences in gradient norms and distance to decision boundary across groups to be responsible for this critical issue. It analyzes these factors in detail, providing both theoretical and empirical support, and proposes a simple, yet effective, solution that mitigates the disparate impacts caused by pruning.

Abstract--Graph clustering plays a pivotal role in unsupervised learning methods like spectral clustering, yet traditional methods for graph clustering often perpetuate bias through unfair graph constructions that may underrepresent some groups. The current research introduces novel approaches for constructing fair k-nearest neighbor (kNN) and fair ϵ-neighborhood graphs that proactively enforce demographic parity during graph formation. By incorporating fairness constraints at the earliest stage of neighborhood selection steps, our approaches incorporate proportional representation of sensitive features into the local graph structure while maintaining geometric consistency. Our work addresses a critical gap in pre-processing for fair spectral clustering, demonstrating that topological fairness in graph construction is essential for achieving equitable clustering outcomes. Widely used graph construction methods like kNN and ϵ-neighborhood graphs propagate edge based disparate impact on sensitive groups, leading to biased clustering results. Providing representation of each sensitive group in the neighborhood of every node leads to fairer spectral clustering results because the topological features of the graph naturally reflect equitable group ratios. This research fills an essential shortcoming in fair unsupervised learning, by illustrating how topological fairness in graph construction inherently facilitates fairer spectral clustering results without the need for changes to the clustering algorithm itself. Thorough experiments on three synthetic datasets, seven real-world tabular datasets, and three real-world image datasets prove that our fair graph construction methods surpass the current baselines in graph clustering tasks. Machine learning algorithms are widely used for decision-making in a variety of fields, including criminal justice [1], healthcare [2], [3], and finance [4]. The reason for this is that these algorithms have been shown to be very accurate and effective at analyzing big datasets. The increasing prevalence of these algorithms has raised questions regarding their fairness and potential to reinforce societal biases [5], [6]. These biases can result in unfair treatment of certain groups of people thereby create significant societal implications. Recently, concerns have been raised about the fairness of clusters produced by popular clustering algorithms.

Non-discrimination is a recognized objective in algorithmic decision making.

A machine learning model may exhibit discrimination when used to make decisions involving people. One potential cause for such outcomes is that the model uses a statistical proxy for a protected demographic attribute. In this paper we formulate a definition of proxy use for the setting of linear regression and present algorithms for detecting proxies. Our definition follows recent work on proxies in classification models, and characterizes a model's constituent behavior that: 1) correlates closely with a protected random variable, and 2) is causally influential in the overall behavior of the model. We show that proxies in linear regression models can be efficiently identified by solving a second-order cone program, and further extend this result to account for situations where the use of a certain input variable is justified as a "business necessity". Finally, we present empirical results on two law enforcement datasets that exhibit varying degrees of racial disparity in prediction outcomes, demonstrating that proxies shed useful light on the causes of discriminatory behavior in models.

However, these decisions may be imperfect due to limited experience, implicit biases, or faulty probabilistic reasoning.

Machine learning models have been criticized for reflecting unfair biases in the training data.

We allow the user to specify the parameters that define fair representation.

We use Rényi DP only to estimate privacy loss.