Clustering is a fundamental unsupervised learning problem where a data-set is partitioned into clusters that consist of nearby points in a metric space. A recent variant, fair clustering, associates a color with each point representing its group membership and requires that each color has (approximately) equal representation in each cluster to satisfy group fairness. In this model, the cost of the clustering objective increases due to enforcing fairness in the algorithm. The relative increase in the cost, the “price of fairness,” can indeed be unbounded. Therefore, in this paper we propose to treat an upper bound on the clustering objective as a constraint on the clustering problem, and to maximize equality of representation subject to it. We consider two fairness objectives: the group utilitarian objective and the group egalitarian objective, as well as the group leximin objective which generalizes the group egalitarian objective. We derive fundamental lower bounds on the approximation of the utilitarian and egalitarian objectives and introduce algorithms with provable guarantees for them. For the leximin objective we introduce an effective heuristic algorithm. We further derive impossibility results for other natural fairness objectives. We conclude with experimental results on real-world datasets that demonstrate the validity of our algorithms. 
                        more » 
                        « less   
                    
                            
                            Scarce Societal Resource Allocation and the Price of (Local) Justice
                        
                    
    
            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   
        
    
    
                            - PAR ID:
- 10206427
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- ISSN:
- 2159-5399
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
- 
            
- 
            Clustering is a fundamental unsupervised learning problem where a dataset is partitioned into clusters that consist of nearby points in a metric space. A recent variant, fair clustering, associates a color with each point representing its group membership and requires that each color has (approximately) equal representation in each cluster to satisfy group fairness. In this model, the cost of the clustering objective increases due to enforcing fairness in the algorithm. The relative increase in the cost, the `''price of fairness,'' can indeed be unbounded. Therefore, in this paper we propose to treat an upper bound on the clustering objective as a constraint on the clustering problem, and to maximize equality of representation subject to it. We consider two fairness objectives: the group utilitarian objective and the group egalitarian objective, as well as the group leximin objective which generalizes the group egalitarian objective. We derive fundamental lower bounds on the approximation of the utilitarian and egalitarian objectives and introduce algorithms with provable guarantees for them. For the leximin objective we introduce an effective heuristic algorithm. We further derive impossibility results for other natural fairness objectives. We conclude with experimental results on real-world datasets that demonstrate the validity of our algorithms.more » « less
- 
            Fueled by algorithmic advances, AI algorithms are increasingly being deployed in settings subject to unanticipated challenges with complex social effects. Motivated by real-world deployment of AI driven, social-network based suicide prevention and landslide risk management interventions, this paper focuses on a robust graph covering problem subject to group fairness constraints. We show that, in the absence of fairness constraints, state-of-the-art algorithms for the robust graph covering problem result in biased node coverage: they tend to discriminate individuals (nodes) based on membership in traditionally marginalized groups. To remediate this issue, we propose a novel formulation of the robust covering problem with fairness constraints and a tractable approximation scheme applicable to real world instances. We provide a formal analysis of the price of group fairness (PoF) for this problem, where we show that uncertainty can lead to greater PoF. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach on several real-world social networks. Our method yields competitive node coverage while significantly improving group fairness relative to state-of-the-art methods.more » « less
- 
            Traditional systems for allocating finite cluster resources among competing jobs have either aimed at providing fairness, relied on users to specify their resource requirements, or have estimated these requirements via surrogate metrics (e.g. CPU utilization). These approaches do not account for a job’s real world performance (e.g. P95 latency). Existing performance-aware systems use offline profiled data and/or are designed for specific allocation objectives. In this work, we argue that resource allocation systems should directly account for real-world performance and the varied allocation objectives of users. In this pursuit, we build Cilantro. At the core of Cilantro is an online learning mechanism which forms feedback loops with the jobs to estimate the resource to performance mappings and load shifts. This relieves users from the onerous task of job profiling and collects reliable real-time feedback. This is then used to achieve a variety of user-specified scheduling objectives. Cilantro handles the uncertainty in the learned models by adapting the underlying policy to work with confidence bounds. We demonstrate this in two settings. First, in a multi-tenant 1000 CPU cluster with 20 independent jobs, three of Cilantro’s policies outperform 9 other baselines on three different performance-aware scheduling objectives, improving user utilities by up to 1.2 − 3.7x. Second, in a microservices setting, where 160 CPUs must be distributed between 19 inter-dependent microservices, Cilantro outperforms 3 other baselines, reducing the end-to-end P99 latency to x0.57 the next best baseline.more » « less
- 
            We study the problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among agents with matroid rank valuations: every good provides a marginal value of 0 or 1 when added to a bundle and valuations are submodular.We present a simple algorithmic framework, calledGeneral Yankee Swap, that can efficiently compute allocations that maximize any justice criterion (or fairness objective) satisfying some mild assumptions. Along with maximizing a justice criterion, General Yankee Swap is guaranteed to maximize utilitarian social welfare, ensure strategyproofness and use at most a quadratic number of valuation queries. We show how General Yankee Swap can be used to compute allocations for five different well-studied justice criteria: (a) Prioritized Lorenz dominance, (b) Maximin fairness, (c) Weighted leximin, (d) Max weighted Nash welfare, and (e) Max weightedp-mean welfare.In particular, this framework provides the first polynomial time algorithms to compute weighted leximin, max weighted Nash welfare and max weightedp-mean welfare allocations for agents with matroid rank valuations. We also extend this framework to the setting of binary chores — items with marginal values -1 or 0 — and similarly show that it can be used to maximize any justice criteria satisfying some mild assumptions.more » « less
 An official website of the United States government
An official website of the United States government 
				
			 
					 
					
 
                                    