An official website of the United States government
We consider the allocation of scarce societal resources, where a central authority decides which individuals receive which resources under capacity or budget constraints. Several algorithmic fairness criteria have been proposed to guide these procedures, each quantifying a notion of local justice to ensure the allocation is aligned with the principles of the local institution making the allocation. For example, the efficient allocation maximizes overall social welfare, whereas the leximin assignment seeks to help the “neediest first.” Although the “price of fairness” (PoF) of leximin has been studied in prior work, we expand on these results by exploiting the structure inherent in real-world scenarios to provide tighter bounds. We further propose a novel criterion – which we term LoINC (leximin over individually normalized costs) – that maximizes a different but commonly used notion of local justice: prioritizing those benefiting the most from receiving the resources. We derive analogous PoF bounds for LoINC, showing that the price of LoINC is typically much lower than that of leximin. We provide extensive experimental results using both synthetic data and in a real-world setting considering the efficacy of different homelessness interventions. These results show that the empirical PoF tends to be substantially lower than worst-case bounds would imply and allow us to characterize situations where the price of LoINC fairness can be high.
more »
« less
Fair Algorithms for Learning in Allocation Problems
Settings such as lending and policing can be modeled by a centralized agent allocating a scarce resource (e.g. loans or police officers) amongst several groups, in order to maximize some objective (e.g. loans given that are repaid, or criminals that are apprehended). Often in such problems fairness is also a concern. One natural notion of fairness, based on general principles of equality of opportunity, asks that conditional on an individual being a candidate for the resource in question, the probability of actually receiving it is approximately independent of the individual’s group. For example, in lending this would mean that equally creditworthy individuals in different racial groups have roughly equal chances of receiving a loan. In policing it would mean that two individuals committing the same crime in different districts would have roughly equal chances of being arrested. In this paper, we formalize this general notion of fairness for allocation problems and investigate its algorithmic consequences. Our main technical results include an efficient learning algorithm that converges to an optimal fair allocation even when the allocator does not know the frequency of candidates (i.e. creditworthy individuals or criminals) in each group. This algorithm operates in a censored feedback model in which only the number of candidates who received the resource in a given allocation can be observed, rather than the true number of candidates in each group. This models the fact that we do not learn the creditworthiness of individuals we do not give loans to and do not learn about crimes committed if the police presence in a district is low.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1763307
- PAR ID:
- 10100408
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- ACM FAT* 2019
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 170 to 179
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
US police militarization is commonly understood as military violence abroad flowing to domestic policing, where it does not belong. Despite years of reform efforts, attempts to demilitarize local police have thus far failed to effect substantive change. This essay builds on the history of US policing, as well as sixteen months of ethnographic research with police in Maryland, to suggest that the ideological labor of policing contributes to these failures. Specifically, I examine two elements of what I call police common sense: preparedness as moral practice and violence as professional technique. In so doing, I demonstrate how policing metabolizes militarization as an apolitical technical craft that counterintuitively reduces violence, and that allows officers to fulfill their primary ethical role as stewards of public crises. Demilitarization reforms function in tandem with the political work of preparedness and professionalism to consecrate “good” militarization as commonsensical and legitimate. These reforms thus inadvertently lend power to the notion of police as the “thin blue line” between extreme violence and innocent (white) society.more » « less
-
Abstract Does providing information about police shootings influence policing reform preferences? We conducted an online survey experiment in 2021 among approximately 2,600 residents of 10 large US cities. It incorporated original data we collected on police shootings of civilians. After respondents estimated the number of police shootings in their cities in 2020, we randomized subjects into three treatment groups and a control group. Treatments included some form of factual information about the police shootings in respondents’ cities (e.g., the actual total number). Afterward, respondents were asked their opinions about five policing reform proposals. Police shooting statistics did not move policing reform preferences. Support for policing reforms is primarily associated with partisanship and ideology, coupled with race. Our findings illuminate key sources of policing reform preferences among the public and reveal potential limits of information-driven, numeric-based initiatives to influence policing in the US.more » « less
-
Racial bias in predictive policing algorithms has been the focus of a number of recent news articles, statements of concern by several national organizations (e.g., the ACLU and NAACP), and simulation-based research. There is reasonable concern that predictive algorithms encourage directed police patrols to target minority communities with discriminatory consequences for minority individuals. However, to date there have been no empirical studies on the bias of predictive algorithms used for police patrol. Here, we test for such biases using arrest data from the Los Angeles predictive policing experiments. We ind that there were no significant differences in the proportion of arrests by racial-ethnic group between control and treatment conditions. We ind that the total numbers of arrests at the division level declined or remained unchanged during predictive policing deployments. Arrests were numerically higher at the algorithmically predicted locations. When adjusted for the higher overall crime rate at algorithmically predicted locations, however, arrests were lower or unchanged.more » « less
-
We consider the problem of dividing limited resources to individuals arriving over T rounds. Each round has a random number of individuals arrive, and individuals can be characterized by their type (i.e., preferences over the different resources). A standard notion of fairness in this setting is that an allocation simultaneously satisfy envy-freeness and efficiency. The former is an individual guarantee, requiring that each agent prefers the agent’s own allocation over the allocation of any other; in contrast, efficiency is a global property, requiring that the allocations clear the available resources. For divisible resources, when the number of individuals of each type are known up front, the desiderata are simultaneously achievable for a large class of utility functions. However, in an online setting when the number of individuals of each type are only revealed round by round, no policy can guarantee these desiderata simultaneously, and hence, the best one can do is to try and allocate so as to approximately satisfy the two properties. We show that, in the online setting, the two desired properties (envy-freeness and efficiency) are in direct contention in that any algorithm achieving additive counterfactual envy-freeness up to a factor of L T necessarily suffers an efficiency loss of at least [Formula: see text]. We complement this uncertainty principle with a simple algorithm, Guarded-Hope, which allocates resources based on an adaptive threshold policy and is able to achieve any fairness–efficiency point on this frontier. Our results provide guarantees for fair online resource allocation with high probability for multiple resource and multiple type settings. In simulation results, our algorithm provides allocations close to the optimal fair solution in hindsight, motivating its use in practical applications as the algorithm is able to adapt to any desired fairness efficiency trade-off. Funding: This work was supported by the National Science Foundation [Grants ECCS-1847393, DMS-1839346, CCF-1948256, and CNS-1955997] and the Army Research Laboratory [Grant W911NF-17-1-0094]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2022.2397 .more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287571
