skip to main content

Title: A Pairwise Fair and Community-preserving Approach to k-Center Clustering
Clustering is a foundational problem in machine learning with numerous applications. As machine learning increases in ubiquity as a back-end for automated systems, concerns about fairness arise. Much of the current literature on fairness deals with discrimination against protected classes in supervised learning (group fairness). We define a different notion of fair clustering wherein the probability that two points (or a community of points) become separated is bounded by an increasing function of their pairwise distance (or community diameter). We capture the situation where data points represent people who gain some benefit from being clustered together. Unfairness arises when certain points are deterministically separated, either arbitrarily or by someone who intends to harm them as in the case of gerrymandering election districts. In response, we formally define two new types of fairness in the clustering setting, pairwise fairness and community preservation. To explore the practicality of our fairness goals, we devise an approach for extending existing k-center algorithms to satisfy these fairness constraints. Analysis of this approach proves that reasonable approximations can be achieved while maintaining fairness. In experiments, we compare the effectiveness of our approach to classical k-center algorithms/heuristics and explore the tradeoff between optimal clustering and fairness.
Authors:
; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1918749
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10212313
Journal Name:
International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML)
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
1178-1189
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Metric clustering is fundamental in areas ranging from Combinatorial Optimization and Data Mining, to Machine Learning and Operations Research. However, in a variety of situations we may have additional requirements or knowledge,distinct from the underlying metric, regarding which pairs of points should be clustered together. To capture and analyze such scenarios, we introduce a novel family of stochastic pairwise constraints, which we incorporate into several essential clustering objectives (radius/median/means). Moreover, we demonstrate that these constraints can succinctly model an intriguing collection of applications, including among others, Individual Fairness in clustering and Must-link constraints in semi-supervised learning. Our main result consistsmore »of a general framework that yields approximation algorithms with provable guarantees for important clustering objectives, while at the same time producing solutions that respect the stochastic pairwise constraints. Furthermore, for certain objectives we devise improved results in the case of Must-link constraints, which are also the best possible from a theoretical perspective. Finally, we present experimental evidence that validates the effectiveness of our algorithms.« less
  2. Metric clustering is fundamental in areas ranging from Combinatorial Optimization and Data Mining, to Machine Learning and Operations Research. However, in a variety of situations we may have additional requirements or knowledge, distinct from the underlying metric, regarding which pairs of points should be clustered together. To capture and analyze such scenarios, we introduce a novel family of stochastic pairwise constraints, which we incorporate into several essential clustering objectives (radius/median/means). Moreover, we demonstrate that these constraints can succinctly model an intriguing collection of applications, including among others Individual Fairness in clustering and Must-link constraints in semi-supervised learning. Our main resultmore »consists of a general framework that yields approximation algorithms with provable guarantees for important clustering objectives, while at the same time producing solutions that respect the stochastic pairwise constraints. Furthermore, for certain objectives we devise improved results in the case of Must-link constraints, which are also the best possible from a theoretical perspective. Finally, we present experimental evidence that validates the effectiveness of our algorithms.« less
  3. Motivated by concerns surrounding the fairness effects of sharing and transferring fair machine learning tools, we propose two algorithms: Fairness Warnings and Fair-MAML. The first is a model-agnostic algorithm that provides interpretable boundary conditions for when a fairly trained model may not behave fairly on similar but slightly different tasks within a given domain. The second is a fair meta-learning approach to train models that can be quickly fine-tuned to specific tasks from only a few number of sample instances while balancing fairness and accuracy. We demonstrate experimentally the individual utility of each model using relevant baselines and provide themore »first experiment to our knowledge of K-shot fairness, i.e. training a fair model on a new task with only K data points. Then, we illustrate the usefulness of both algorithms as a combined method for training models from a few data points on new tasks while using Fairness Warnings as interpretable boundary conditions under which the newly trained model may not be fair.« less
  4. Abstract Subspace clustering is the unsupervised grouping of points lying near a union of low-dimensional linear subspaces. Algorithms based directly on geometric properties of such data tend to either provide poor empirical performance, lack theoretical guarantees or depend heavily on their initialization. We present a novel geometric approach to the subspace clustering problem that leverages ensembles of the $K$-subspace (KSS) algorithm via the evidence accumulation clustering framework. Our algorithm, referred to as ensemble $K$-subspaces (EKSSs), forms a co-association matrix whose $(i,j)$th entry is the number of times points $i$ and $j$ are clustered together by several runs of KSS withmore »random initializations. We prove general recovery guarantees for any algorithm that forms an affinity matrix with entries close to a monotonic transformation of pairwise absolute inner products. We then show that a specific instance of EKSS results in an affinity matrix with entries of this form, and hence our proposed algorithm can provably recover subspaces under similar conditions to state-of-the-art algorithms. The finding is, to the best of our knowledge, the first recovery guarantee for evidence accumulation clustering and for KSS variants. We show on synthetic data that our method performs well in the traditionally challenging settings of subspaces with large intersection, subspaces with small principal angles and noisy data. Finally, we evaluate our algorithm on six common benchmark datasets and show that unlike existing methods, EKSS achieves excellent empirical performance when there are both a small and large number of points per subspace.« less
  5. 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 objectivemore »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.« less