Causal inference is at the heart of empirical research in natu- ral and social sciences and is critical for scientific discovery and informed decision making. The gold standard in causal inference is performing randomized controlled trials; unfortu- nately these are not always feasible due to ethical, legal, or cost constraints. As an alternative, methodologies for causal inference from observational data have been developed in sta- tistical studies and social sciences. However, existing meth- ods critically rely on restrictive assumptions such as the study population consisting of homogeneous elements that can be represented in a single flat table, where each row is referred to as a unit. In contrast, in many real-world set- tings, the study domain naturally consists of heterogeneous elements with complex relational structure, where the data is naturally represented in multiple related tables. In this paper, we present a formal framework for causal inference from such relational data. We propose a declarative language called CaRL for capturing causal background knowledge and assumptions, and specifying causal queries using simple Datalog-like rules. CaRL provides a foundation for infer- ring causality and reasoning about the effect of complex interventions in relational domains. We present an extensive experimental evaluation on real relational data to illustrate the applicability of CaRL in social sciences and healthcare.
more »
« less
Disaggregated Interventions to Reduce Inequality
A significant body of research in the data sciences considers unfair discrimination against social categories such as race or gender that could occur or be amplified as a result of algorithmic decisions. Simultaneously, real-world disparities continue to exist, even before
algorithmic decisions are made. In this work, we draw on insights from the social sciences brought into the realm of causal modeling and constrained optimization, and develop a novel algorithmic framework for tackling pre-existing real-world disparities. The purpose of our framework, which we call the “impact remediation framework,” is to measure real-world disparities and discover the optimal intervention policies that could help improve equity or
access to opportunity for those who are underserved with respect to an outcome of interest.
We develop a disaggregated approach to tackling pre-existing disparities that relaxes the typical set of assumptions required for the use of social categories in structural causal models. Our approach flexibly incorporates counterfactuals and is compatible with various ontological assumptions about the nature of social categories. We demonstrate impact remediation with a hypothetical case study and compare our disaggregated approach to an existing state-of-the-art approach, comparing its structure and resulting policy recommendations. In contrast to most work on optimal policy learning, we explore disparity reduction itself as an objective, explicitly focusing the power of algorithms on reducing inequality.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10308525
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization (EAAMO ’21)
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)In this paper we propose a causal modeling approach to intersectional fairness, and a flexible, task-specific method for computing intersectionally fair rankings. Rankings are used in many contexts, ranging from Web search to college admissions, but causal inference for fair rankings has received limited attention. Additionally, the growing literature on causal fairness has directed little attention to intersectionality. By bringing these issues together in a formal causal framework we make the application of intersectionality in algorithmic fairness explicit, connected to important real world effects and domain knowledge, and transparent about technical limitations. We experimentally evaluate our approach on real and synthetic datasets, exploring its behavior under different structural assumptions.more » « less
-
more » « less
Causal decomposition analysis aims to identify risk factors (referred to as “mediators”) that contribute to social disparities in an outcome. Despite promising developments in causal decomposition analysis, current methods are limited to addressing a time-fixed mediator and outcome only, which has restricted our understanding of the causal mechanisms underlying social disparities. In particular, existing approaches largely overlook individual characteristics when designing (hypothetical) interventions to reduce disparities. To address this issue, we extend current longitudinal mediation approaches to the context of disparities research. Specifically, we develop a novel decomposition analysis method that addresses individual characteristics by (a) using optimal dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs) and (b) conditioning on a selective set of individual characteristics. Incorporating optimal DTRs into the design of interventions can be used to strike a balance between equity (reducing disparities) and excellence (improving individuals’ outcomes). We illustrate the proposed method using the High School Longitudinal Study data.
-
null (Ed.)While real-world decisions involve many competing objectives, algorithmic decisions are often evaluated with a single objective function. In this paper, we study algorithmic policies which explicitly trade off between a private objective (such as profit) and a public objective (such as social welfare). We analyze a natural class of policies which trace an empirical Pareto frontier based on learned scores, and focus on how such decisions can be made in noisy or data-limited regimes. Our theoretical results characterize the optimal strategies in this class, bound the Pareto errors due to inaccuracies in the scores, and show an equivalence between optimal strategies and a rich class of fairness-constrained profit-maximizing policies. We then present empirical results in two different contexts — online content recommendation and sustainable abalone fisheries — to underscore the generality of our approach to a wide range of practical decisions. Taken together, these results shed light on inherent trade-offs in using machine learning for decisions that impact social welfare.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)While real-world decisions involve many competing objectives, algorithmic decisions are often evaluated with a single objective function. In this paper, we study algorithmic policies which explicitly trade off between a private objective (such as profit) and a public objective (such as social welfare). We analyze a natural class of policies which trace an empirical Pareto frontier based on learned scores, and focus on how such decisions can be made in noisy or data-limited regimes. Our theoretical results characterize the optimal strategies in this class, bound the Pareto errors due to inaccuracies in the scores, and show an equivalence between optimal strategies and a rich class of fairness-constrained profit-maximizing policies. We then present empirical results in two different contexts — online content recommendation and sustainable abalone fisheries — to underscore the generality of our approach to a wide range of practical decisions. Taken together, these results shed light on inherent trade-offs in using machine learning for decisions that impact social welfare.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3465416.3483286
