A new strategy for fair supervised machine learning is proposed. The main advantages of the proposed strategy as compared to others in the literature are as follows. (a) We introduce a new smooth nonconvex surrogate to approximate the Heaviside functions involved in discontinuous unfairness measures. The surrogate is based on smoothing methods from the optimization literature, and is new for the fair supervised learning literature. The surrogate is a tight approximation which ensures the trained prediction models are fair, as opposed to other (e.g., convex) surrogates that can fail to lead to a fair prediction model in practice. (b) Rather than rely on regularizers (that lead to optimization problems that are difficult to solve) and corresponding regularization parameters (that can be expensive to tune), we propose a strategy that employs hard constraints so that specific tolerances for unfairness can be enforced without the complications associated with the use of regularization. (c) Our proposed strategy readily allows for constraints on multiple (potentially conflicting) unfairness measures at the same time. Multiple measures can be considered with a regularization approach, but at the cost of having even more difficult optimization problems to solve and further expense for tuning. By contrast, through hard constraints, our strategy leads to optimization models that can be solved tractably with minimal tuning.

Infectious diseases pose major public health challenges to society, highlighting the importance of designing effective policies to reduce economic loss and mortality. In this paper, we propose a framework for sequential decision-making under uncertainty to design fairness-aware disease mitigation policies that incorporate various measures of unfairness. Specifically, our approach learns equitable vaccination and lockdown strategies based on a stochastic multi-group SIR model. To address the challenges of solving the resulting sequential decision-making problem, we adopt the path integral control algorithm as an efficient solution scheme. Through a case study, we demonstrate that our approach effectively improves fairness compared to conventional methods and provides valuable insights for policymakers.

Algorithmic fairness in machine learning has recently garnered significant attention. However, two pressing challenges remain: (1) The fairness guarantees of existing fair classification methods often rely on specific data distribution assumptions and large sample sizes, which can lead to fairness violations when the sample size is moderate-a common situation in practice. (2) Due to legal and societal considerations, using sensitive group attributes during decision-making (referred to as the group-blind setting) may not always be feasible. In this work, we quantify the impact of enforcing algorithmic fairness and group-blindness in binary classification under group fairness constraints. Specifically, we propose a unified framework for fair classification that provides distribution-free and finite-sample fairness guarantees with controlled excess risk. This framework is applicable to various group fairness notions in both group-aware and group-blind scenarios. Furthermore, we establish a minimax lower bound on the excess risk, showing the minimax optimality of our proposed algorithm up to logarithmic factors. Through extensive simulation studies and real data analysis, we further demonstrate the superior performance of our algorithm compared to existing methods, and provide empirical support for our theoretical findings.

This paper introduces a novel information-theoretic perspective on the relationship between prominent group fairness notions in machine learning, namely statistical parity, equalized odds, and predictive parity. It is well known that simultaneous satisfiability of these three fairness notions is usually impossible, motivating practitioners to resort to approximate fairness solutions rather than stringent satisfiability of these definitions. However, a comprehensive analysis of their interrelations, particularly when they are not exactly satisfied, remains largely unexplored. Our main contribution lies in elucidating an exact relationship between these three measures of (un)fairness by leveraging a body of work in information theory called partial information decomposition (PID). In this work, we leverage PID to identify the granular regions where these three measures of (un)fairness overlap and where they disagree with each other leading to potential tradeoffs. We also include numerical simulations to complement our results.

We propose a distributionally robust support vector machine with a fairness constraint that encourages the classifier to be fair in view of the equality of opportunity criterion. We use a type-$\infty$ Wasserstein ambiguity set centered at the empirical distribution to model distributional uncertainty and derive an exact reformulation for worst-case unfairness measure. We establish that the model is equivalent to a mixed-binary optimization problem, which can be solved by standard off-the-shelf solvers. We further prove that the expectation of the hinge loss objective function constitutes an upper bound on the misclassification probability. Finally, we numerically demonstrate that our proposed approach improves fairness with negligible loss of predictive accuracy.

We propose a distributionally robust logistic regression model with an unfairness penalty that prevents discrimination with respect to sensitive attributes such as gender or ethnicity. This model is equivalent to a tractable convex optimization problem if a Wasserstein ball centered at the empirical distribution on the training data is used to model distributional uncertainty and if a new convex unfairness measure is used to incentivize equalized opportunities. We demonstrate that the resulting classifier improves fairness at a marginal loss of predictive accuracy on both synthetic and real datasets. We also derive linear programming-based confidence bounds on the level of unfairness of any pre-trained classifier by leveraging techniques from optimal uncertainty quantification over Wasserstein balls.