fairness notion
Double Fairness Policy Learning: Integrating Action Fairness and Outcome Fairness in Decision-making
Bian, Zeyu, Wang, Lan, Shi, Chengchun, Qi, Zhengling
Fairness is a central pillar of trustworthy machine learning, especially in domains where accuracy- or profit-driven optimization is insufficient. While most fairness research focuses on supervised learning, fairness in policy learning remains less explored. Because policy learning is interventional, it induces two distinct fairness targets: action fairness (equitable action assignments) and outcome fairness (equitable downstream consequences). Crucially, equalizing actions does not generally equalize outcomes when groups face different constraints or respond differently to the same action. We propose a novel double fairness learning (DFL) framework that explicitly manages the trade-off among three objectives: action fairness, outcome fairness, and value maximization. We integrate fairness directly into a multi-objective optimization problem for policy learning and employ a lexicographic weighted Tchebyshev method that recovers Pareto solutions beyond convex settings, with theoretical guarantees on the regret bounds. Our framework is flexible and accommodates various commonly used fairness notions. Extensive simulations demonstrate improved performance relative to competing methods. In applications to a motor third-party liability insurance dataset and an entrepreneurship training dataset, DFL substantially improves both action and outcome fairness while incurring only a modest reduction in overall value.
- North America > United States > New York > New York County > New York City (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > Spain > Catalonia > Barcelona Province > Barcelona (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Health & Medicine (1.00)
- Banking & Finance > Insurance (1.00)
- Law (0.92)
Fair Sequential Selection Using Supervised Learning Models
We consider a selection problem where sequentially arrived applicants apply for a limited number of positions/jobs. At each time step, a decision maker accepts or rejects the given applicant using a pre-trained supervised learning model until all the vacant positions are filled. In this paper, we discuss whether the fairness notions (e.g., equal opportunity, statistical parity, etc.) that are commonly used in classification problems are suitable for the sequential selection problems. In particular, we show that even with a pre-trained model that satisfies the common fairness notions, the selection outcomes may still be biased against certain demographic groups. This observation implies that the fairness notions used in classification problems are not suitable for a selection problem where the applicants compete for a limited number of positions. We introduce a new fairness notion, ``Equal Selection (ES),'' suitable for sequential selection problems and propose a post-processing approach to satisfy the ES fairness notion. We also consider a setting where the applicants have privacy concerns, and the decision maker only has access to the noisy version of sensitive attributes. In this setting, we can show that the \textit{perfect} ES fairness can still be attained under certain conditions.
Counterfactually Fair Representation
The use of machine learning models in high-stake applications (e.g., healthcare, lending, college admission) has raised growing concerns due to potential biases against protected social groups. Various fairness notions and methods have been proposed to mitigate such biases. In this work, we focus on Counterfactual Fairness (CF), a fairness notion that is dependent on an underlying causal graph and first proposed by Kusner $\textit{et al.}$; it requires that the outcome an individual perceives is the same in the real world as it would be in a counterfactual world, in which the individual belongs to another social group. Learning fair models satisfying CF can be challenging. It was shown in (Kusner $\textit{et al.}$) that a sufficient condition for satisfying CF is to $\textbf{not}$ use features that are descendants of sensitive attributes in the causal graph. This implies a simple method that learns CF models only using non-descendants of sensitive attributes while eliminating all descendants. Although several subsequent works proposed methods that use all features for training CF models, there is no theoretical guarantee that they can satisfy CF. In contrast, this work proposes a new algorithm that trains models using all the available features. We theoretically and empirically show that models trained with this method can satisfy CF.
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Los Angeles County > Long Beach (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Law (1.00)
- Government (0.68)
- North America > United States > Ohio > Franklin County > Columbus (0.04)
- North America > United States > Ohio > Delaware County > Delaware (0.04)
- North America > United States > Delaware > New Castle County > Newark (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Information Technology > Security & Privacy (1.00)
- Banking & Finance (1.00)
- Law (0.93)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Oxfordshire > Oxford (0.04)
- Europe > Monaco (0.04)
- Asia > Singapore (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Israel (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > California (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Media (1.00)
- Law (1.00)
- Information Technology > Services (1.00)
- (2 more...)
Supplementary material - ABCFair: an Adaptable Benchmark approach for Comparing Fairness Methods
We used the sex and the education of the student's parents as the sensitive attributes for this dataset. We removed all features that are other expressions of the labels (i.e. Note that this is the only folktables dataset on which we report results in the main paper. Sex, age, and rage are used as sensitive features for this datasets. We deem these features as not relevant for this use case.
- North America > United States > Hawaii > Honolulu County > Honolulu (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Quebec > Montreal (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Bristol (0.04)
- (3 more...)
- Information Technology (0.46)
- Education (0.46)
- North America > United States > Virginia (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > Georgia > Fulton County > Atlanta (0.04)
- (4 more...)