Although the fairness community has recognized the importance of data, re-searchers in the area primarily rely on UCIAdult when it comes to tabular data. Derived from a 1994 USCensus survey, this dataset has appeared in hundreds of research papers where it served as the basis for the development and comparison of many algorithmic fairness interventions. We reconstruct a superset of the UCI Adult data from available USCensus sources and reveal idiosyncrasies of the UCIAdult dataset that limit its external validity. Our primary contribution is asuite of new datasets derived from USCensus surveys that extend the existing data ecosystem for research on fair machine learning. We create prediction tasks relating to income, employment, health, transportation, and housing. The data span multiple years and all states of the United States, allowing researchers to studytemporal shift and geographic variation. We highlight a broad initial sweep of new empirical insights relating to trade-offs between fairness criteria, performance of algorithmic interventions, and the role of distribution shift based on our new datasets. Our findings inform ongoing debates, challenge some existing narratives, and point to future research directions.

The fair-ranking problem, which asks to rank a given set of items to maximize utility subject togroup fairness constraints, has received attention inthe fairness, information retrieval, and machine learning literature.

Although the fairness community has recognized the importance of data, re-searchers inthe area primarily rely on UCIAdult when itcomes totabular data.

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.

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.

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.

Ensuring algorithmic fairness remains a significant challenge in machine learning, particularly as models are increasingly applied across diverse domains. While numerous fairness criteria exist, they often lack generalizability across different machine learning problems. This paper examines the connections and differences among various sparsity measures in promoting fairness and proposes a unified sparsity-based framework for evaluating algorithmic fairness. The framework aligns with existing fairness criteria and demonstrates broad applicability to a wide range of machine learning tasks. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework as an evaluation metric through extensive experiments on a variety of datasets and bias mitigation methods. This work provides a novel perspective to algorithmic fairness by framing it through the lens of sparsity and social equity, offering potential for broader impact on fairness research and applications.