Machine learning models in high-stakes applications, such as recidivism prediction and automated personnel selection, often exhibit systematic performance disparities across sensitive subpopulations, raising critical concerns regarding algorithmic bias. Fairness auditing addresses these risks through two primary functions: certification, which verifies adherence to fairness constraints; and flagging, which isolates specific demographic groups experiencing disparate treatment. However, existing auditing techniques are frequently limited by restrictive distributional assumptions or prohibitive computational overhead. We propose a novel empirical likelihood-based (EL) framework that constructs robust statistical measures for model performance disparities. Unlike traditional methods, our approach is non-parametric; the proposed disparity statistics follow asymptotically chi-square or mixed chi-square distributions, ensuring valid inference without assuming underlying data distributions. This framework uses a constrained optimization profile that admits stable numerical solutions, facilitating both large-scale certification and efficient subpopulation discovery. Empirically, the EL methods outperform bootstrap-based approaches, yielding coverage rates closer to nominal levels while reducing computational latency by several orders of magnitude. We demonstrate the practical utility of this framework on the COMPAS dataset, where it successfully flags intersectional biases, specifically identifying a significantly higher positive prediction rate for African-American males under 25 and a systemic under-prediction for Caucasian females relative to the population mean.

Recent studies on Graph Neural Networks(GNNs) provide both empirical and theoretical evidence supporting their effectiveness in capturing structural patterns on both homophilic and certain heterophilic graphs. Notably, most real-world homophilic and heterophilic graphs are comprised of a mixture of nodes in both homophilic and heterophilic structural patterns, exhibiting a structural disparity. However, the analysis of GNN performance with respect to nodes exhibiting different structural patterns, e.g., homophilic nodes in heterophilic graphs, remains rather limited. In the present study, we provide evidence that Graph Neural Networks(GNNs) on node classification typically perform admirably on homophilic nodes within homophilic graphs and heterophilic nodes within heterophilic graphs while struggling on the opposite node set, exhibiting a performance disparity. We theoretically and empirically identify effects of GNNs on testing nodes exhibiting distinct structural patterns. We then propose a rigorous, non-i.i.d PAC-Bayesian generalization bound for GNNs, revealing reasons for the performance disparity, namely the aggregated feature distance and homophily ratio difference between training and testing nodes. Furthermore, we demonstrate the practical implications of our new findings via (1) elucidating the effectiveness of deeper GNNs; and (2) revealing an over-looked distribution shift factor on graph out-of-distribution problem and proposing a new scenario accordingly.

Addressing such performance gaps remains a challenge, as little is understood about why performance degrades across incomes or geographies.We take a step in this direction by annotating images from Dollar Street, a popular benchmark of geographically and economically diverse images, labeling each image with factors such as color, shape, and background. These annotations unlock a new granular view into how objects differ across incomes/regions. We then use these object differences to pinpoint model vulnerabilities across incomes and regions.We study a range of modern vision models, finding that performance disparities are most associated with differences in, and images with .We illustrate how insights from our factor labels can surface mitigations to improve models' performance disparities.As an example, we show that mitigating a model's vulnerability to texture can improve performance on the lower income level. We release all the factor annotations along with an interactive dashboardto facilitate research into more equitable vision systems.

Analyzing machine learning model performance stratified by patient and recording properties is becoming the accepted norm and often yields crucial insights about important model failure modes. Performing such analyses in a statistically rigorous manner is non-trivial, however. Appropriate performance metrics must be selected that allow for valid comparisons between groups of different sample sizes and base rates; metric uncertainty must be determined and multiple comparisons be corrected for, in order to assess whether any observed differences may be purely due to chance; and in the case of intersectional analyses, mechanisms must be implemented to find the most `interesting' subgroups within combinatorially many subgroup combinations. We here present a statistical toolbox that addresses these challenges and enables practitioners to easily yet rigorously assess their models for potential subgroup performance disparities. While broadly applicable, the toolbox is specifically designed for medical imaging applications. The analyses provided by the toolbox are illustrated in two case studies, one in skin lesion malignancy classification on the ISIC2020 dataset and one in chest X-ray-based disease classification on the MIMIC-CXR dataset.

Deep learning models aim to improve diagnostic workflows, but fairness evaluation remains underexplored beyond classification, e.g., in image segmentation. Unaddressed segmentation bias can lead to disparities in the quality of care for certain populations, potentially compounded across clinical decision points and amplified through iterative model development. Here, we audit the fairness of the automated segmentation labels provided in the breast cancer tumor segmentation dataset MAMA-MIA. We evaluate automated segmentation quality across age, ethnicity, and data source. Our analysis reveals an intrinsic age-related bias against younger patients that continues to persist even after controlling for confounding factors, such as data source. We hypothesize that this bias may be linked to physiological factors, a known challenge for both radiologists and automated systems. Finally, we show how aggregating data from multiple data sources influences site-specific ethnic biases, underscoring the necessity of investigating data at a granular level.

As end-user device capability increases and demand for intelligent services at the Internet's edge rise, distributed learning has emerged as a key enabling technology. Existing approaches like federated learning (FL) and decentralized FL (DFL) enable distributed learning among clients, while gossip learning (GL) approaches have emerged to address the potential challenges in resource-constrained, connectivity-challenged infrastructure-less environments. However, most distributed learning approaches assume largely homogeneous data distributions and may not consider or exploit the heterogeneity of clients and their underlying data distributions. This paper introduces Chisme, a novel fully decentralized distributed learning algorithm designed to address the challenges of implementing robust intelligence in network edge contexts characterized by heterogeneous data distributions, episodic connectivity, and sparse network infrastructure. Chisme leverages cosine similarity-based data affinity heuristics calculated from received model exchanges to inform how much influence received models have when merging into the local model. By doing so, it facilitates stronger merging influence between clients with more similar model learning progressions, enabling clients to strategically balance between broader collaboration to build more general knowledge and more selective collaboration to build specific knowledge. We evaluate Chisme against contemporary approaches using image recognition and time-series prediction scenarios while considering different network connectivity conditions, representative of real-world distributed intelligent systems. Our experiments demonstrate that Chisme outperforms state-of-the-art edge intelligence approaches in almost every case -- clients using Chisme exhibit faster training convergence, lower final loss after training, and lower performance disparity between clients.

Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used to support clinical decision-making. However, real-world medical datasets are often noisy, incomplete, and imbalanced, leading to performance disparities across patient subgroups. These differences raise fairness concerns, particularly when they reinforce existing disadvantages for marginalized groups. In this work, we analyze several medical prediction tasks and demonstrate how model performance varies with patient characteristics. While ML models may demonstrate good overall performance, we argue that subgroup-level evaluation is essential before integrating them into clinical workflows. By conducting a performance analysis at the subgroup level, differences can be clearly identified-allowing, on the one hand, for performance disparities to be considered in clinical practice, and on the other hand, for these insights to inform the responsible development of more effective models. Thereby, our work contributes to a practical discussion around the subgroup-sensitive development and deployment of medical ML models and the interconnectedness of fairness and transparency.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been extensively tuned to mitigate explicit biases, yet they often exhibit subtle implicit biases rooted in their pre-training data. Rather than directly probing LLMs with human-crafted questions that may trigger guardrails, we propose studying how models behave when they proactively ask questions themselves. The 20 Questions game, a multi-turn deduction task, serves as an ideal testbed for this purpose. We systematically evaluate geographic performance disparities in entity deduction using a new dataset, Geo20Q+, consisting of both notable people and culturally significant objects (e.g., foods, landmarks, animals) from diverse regions. We test popular LLMs across two gameplay configurations (canonical 20-question and unlimited turns) and in seven languages (English, Hindi, Mandarin, Japanese, French, Spanish, and Turkish). Our results reveal geographic disparities: LLMs are substantially more successful at deducing entities from the Global North than the Global South, and the Global West than the Global East. While Wikipedia pageviews and pre-training corpus frequency correlate mildly with performance, they fail to fully explain these disparities. Notably, the language in which the game is played has minimal impact on performance gaps. These findings demonstrate the value of creative, free-form evaluation frameworks for uncovering subtle biases in LLMs that remain hidden in standard prompting setups. By analyzing how models initiate and pursue reasoning goals over multiple turns, we find geographic and cultural disparities embedded in their reasoning processes. We release the dataset (Geo20Q+) and code at https://sites.google.com/view/llmbias20q/home.