fairness criteria
Group Retention when Using Machine Learning in Sequential Decision Making: the Interplay between User Dynamics and Fairness
Machine Learning (ML) models trained on data from multiple demographic groups can inherit representation disparity (Hashimoto et al., 2018) that may exist in the data: the model may be less favorable to groups contributing less to the training process; this in turn can degrade population retention in these groups over time, and exacerbate representation disparity in the long run. In this study, we seek to understand the interplay between ML decisions and the underlying group representation, how they evolve in a sequential framework, and how the use of fairness criteria plays a role in this process. We show that the representation disparity can easily worsen over time under a natural user dynamics (arrival and departure) model when decisions are made based on a commonly used objective and fairness criteria, resulting in some groups diminishing entirely from the sample pool in the long run. It highlights the fact that fairness criteria have to be defined while taking into consideration the impact of decisions on user dynamics. Toward this end, we explain how a proper fairness criterion can be selected based on a general user dynamics model.
Fairness Reprogramming
Despite a surge of recent advances in promoting machine Learning (ML) fairness, the existing mainstream approaches mostly require training or finetuning the entire weights of the neural network to meet the fairness criteria. However, this is often infeasible in practice for those large-scale trained models due to large computational and storage costs, low data efficiency, and model privacy issues. In this paper, we propose a new generic fairness learning paradigm, called FairReprogram, which incorporates the model reprogramming technique. Specifically, FairReprogram considers the case where models can not be changed and appends to the input a set of perturbations, called the fairness trigger, which is tuned towards the fairness criteria under a min-max formulation. We further introduce an information-theoretic framework that explains why and under what conditions fairness goals can be achieved using the fairness trigger. We show both theoretically and empirically that the fairness trigger can effectively obscure demographic biases in the output prediction of fixed ML models by providing false demographic information that hinders the model from utilizing the correct demographic information to make the prediction. Extensive experiments on both NLP and CV datasets demonstrate that our method can achieve better fairness improvements than retraining-based methods with far less data dependency under two widely-used fairness criteria.
Robust Optimization for Fairness with Noisy Protected Groups
Many existing fairness criteria for machine learning involve equalizing some metric across protected groups such as race or gender. However, practitioners trying to audit or enforce such group-based criteria can easily face the problem of noisy or biased protected group information. First, we study the consequences of naively relying on noisy protected group labels: we provide an upper bound on the fairness violations on the true groups $G$ when the fairness criteria are satisfied on noisy groups $\hat{G}$. Second, we introduce two new approaches using robust optimization that, unlike the naive approach of only relying on $\hat{G}$, are guaranteed to satisfy fairness criteria on the true protected groups $G$ while minimizing a training objective. We provide theoretical guarantees that one such approach converges to an optimal feasible solution. Using two case studies, we show empirically that the robust approaches achieve better true group fairness guarantees than the naive approach.
- North America > United States > Michigan (0.04)
- North America > Canada (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Republic of Türkiye > Ankara Province > Ankara (0.04)
- Africa > South Sudan > Equatoria > Central Equatoria > Juba (0.04)
Fairness Reprogramming
Despite a surge of recent advances in promoting machine Learning (ML) fairness, the existing mainstream approaches mostly require training or finetuning the entire weights of the neural network to meet the fairness criteria. However, this is often infeasible in practice for those large-scale trained models due to large computational and storage costs, low data efficiency, and model privacy issues.
- North America > United States > Michigan (0.04)
- Asia > China > Hong Kong (0.04)
- South America > Paraguay > Asunción > Asunción (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > San Francisco County > San Francisco (0.14)
- North America > United States > New York > New York County > New York City (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Information Management (0.68)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language (0.68)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (0.46)
- South America > Chile > Santiago Metropolitan Region > Santiago Province > Santiago (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > San Francisco County > San Francisco (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Israel > Tel Aviv District > Tel Aviv (0.04)
- Europe > Ukraine > Kyiv Oblast > Kyiv (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Europe > France (0.40)
- North America > United States > Minnesota > Hennepin County > Minneapolis (0.14)
- North America > United States > California (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- North America > Canada (0.24)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Europe > France (0.04)
- Asia > Taiwan (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Performance Analysis > Accuracy (0.96)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (0.95)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (0.68)