Discrimination in machine learning often arises along multiple dimensions (a.k.a.

Algorithmic fairness is a socially crucial topic in real-world applications of AI. Among many notions of fairness, subgroup fairness is widely studied when multiple sensitive attributes (e.g., gender, race, age) are present. However, as the number of sensitive attributes grows, the number of subgroups increases accordingly, creating heavy computational burdens and data sparsity problem (subgroups with too small sizes). In this paper, we develop a novel learning algorithm for subgroup fairness which resolves these issues by focusing on subgroups with sufficient sample sizes as well as marginal fairness (fairness for each sensitive attribute). To this end, we formalize a notion of subgroup-subset fairness and introduce a corresponding distributional fairness measure called the supremum Integral Probability Metric (supIPM). Building on this formulation, we propose the Doubly Regressing Adversarial learning for subgroup Fairness (DRAF) algorithm, which reduces a surrogate fairness gap for supIPM with much less computation than directly reducing supIPM. Theoretically, we prove that the proposed surrogate fairness gap is an upper bound of supIPM. Empirically, we show that the DRAF algorithm outperforms baseline methods in benchmark datasets, specifically when the number of sensitive attributes is large so that many subgroups are very small.

This paper introduces marginal fairness, a new individual fairness notion for equitable decision-making in the presence of protected attributes such as gender, race, and religion. This criterion ensures that decisions--based on generalized distortion risk measures--are insensitive to distributional perturbations in protected attributes, regardless of whether these attributes are continuous, discrete, categorical, univariate, or multivariate. To operationalize this notion and reflect real-world regulatory environments (such as the EU gender-neutral pricing regulation), we model business decision-making in highly regulated industries (such as insurance and finance) as a two-step process: (i) a predictive modeling stage, in which a prediction function for the target variable (e.g., insurance losses) is estimated based on both protected and non-protected covariates; and (ii) a decision-making stage, in which a generalized distortion risk measure is applied to the target variable, conditional only on non-protected covariates, to determine the decision. In this second step we modify the risk measure such that the decision becomes insensitive to the protected attribute, thus enforcing fairness to ensure equitable outcomes under risk-sensitive, regulatory constraints. Furthermore, by utilising the concept of cascade sensitivity, we extend the marginal fairness framework to capture how dependencies between covariates propagate the influence of protected attributes through the modeling pipeline. A numerical study and an empirical implementation using an auto insurance dataset demonstrate how the framework can be applied in practice.

Discrimination in machine learning often arises along multiple dimensions (a.k.a. It is known that ensuring \emph{marginal fairness} for every dimension independently is not sufficient in general. Due to the exponential number of subgroups, however, directly measuring intersectional fairness from data is impossible. In this paper, our primary goal is to understand in detail the relationship between marginal and intersectional fairness through statistical analysis. We first identify a set of sufficient conditions under which an exact relationship can be obtained.

Kearns et al. [2018] recently proposed a notion of rich subgroup fairness intended to bridge the gap between statistical and individual notions of fairness. Rich subgroup fairness picks a statistical fairness constraint (say, equalizing false positive rates across protected groups), but then asks that this constraint hold over an exponentially or infinitely large collection of subgroups defined by a class of functions with bounded VC dimension. They give an algorithm guaranteed to learn subject to this constraint, under the condition that it has access to oracles for perfectly learning absent a fairness constraint. In this paper, we undertake an extensive empirical evaluation of the algorithm of Kearns et al. On four real datasets for which fairness is a concern, we investigate the basic convergence of the algorithm when instantiated with fast heuristics in place of learning oracles, measure the tradeoffs between fairness and accuracy, and compare this approach with the recent algorithm of Agarwal et al. [2018], which implements weaker and more traditional marginal fairness constraints defined by individual protected attributes. We find that in general, the Kearns et al. algorithm converges quickly, large gains in fairness can be obtained with mild costs to accuracy, and that optimizing accuracy subject only to marginal fairness leads to classifiers with substantial subgroup unfairness. We also provide a number of analyses and visualizations of the dynamics and behavior of the Kearns et al. algorithm. Overall we find this algorithm to be effective on real data, and rich subgroup fairness to be a viable notion in practice.