The astonishing successes of ML have raised growing concern for the fairness of modern methods when deployed in real world settings. However, studies on fairness have mostly focused on supervised ML, while unsupervised outlier detection (OD), with numerous applications in finance, security, etc., have attracted little attention. While a few studies proposed fairness-enhanced OD algorithms, they remain agnostic to the underlying driving mechanisms or sources of unfairness. Even within the supervised ML literature, there exists debate on whether unfairness stems solely from algorithmic biases (i.e. design choices) or from the biases encoded in the data on which they are trained. To close this gap, this work aims to shed light on the possible sources of unfairness in OD by auditing detection models under different data-centric factors. By injecting various known biases into the input data -- as pertain to sample size disparity, under-representation, feature measurement noise, and group membership obfuscation -- we find that the OD algorithms under the study all exhibit fairness pitfalls, although differing in which types of data bias they are more susceptible to. Most notable of our study is to demonstrate that OD algorithm bias is not merely a data bias problem. A key realization is that the data properties that emerge from bias injection could as well be organic -- as pertain to natural group differences w.r.t. sparsity, base rate, variance, and multi-modality. Either natural or biased, such data properties can give rise to unfairness as they interact with certain algorithmic design choices.

Fairness and Outlier Detection (OD) are closely related, as it is exactly the goal of OD to spot rare, minority samples in a given population. When being a minority (as defined by protected variables, e.g. race/ethnicity/sex/age) does not reflect positive-class membership (e.g. criminal/fraud), however, OD produces unjust outcomes. Surprisingly, fairness-aware OD has been almost untouched in prior work, as fair machine learning literature mainly focus on supervised settings. Our work aims to bridge this gap. Specifically, we develop desiderata capturing well-motivated fairness criteria for OD, and systematically formalize the fair OD problem. Further, guided by our desiderata, we propose FairOD, a fairness-aware outlier detector, which has the following, desirable properties: FairOD (1) does not employ disparate treatment at test time, (2) aims to flag equal proportions of samples from all groups (i.e. obtain group fairness, via statistical parity), and (3) strives to flag truly high-risk fraction of samples within each group. Extensive experiments on a diverse set of synthetic and real world datasets show that FairOD produces outcomes that are fair with respect to protected variables, while performing comparable to (and in some cases, even better than) fairness-agnostic detectors in terms of detection performance.