- Award ID(s):
- 1900644
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10355516
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning
- Volume:
- 39
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 5286-5308
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Recent works have shown that imposing tensor structures on the coefficient tensor in regression problems can lead to more reliable parameter estimation and lower sample complexity compared to vector-based methods. This work investigates a new low-rank tensor model, called Low Separation Rank (LSR), in Generalized Linear Model (GLM) problems. The LSR model – which generalizes the well-known Tucker and CANDECOMP/PARAFAC (CP) models, and is a special case of the Block Tensor Decomposition (BTD) model – is imposed onto the coefficient tensor in the GLM model. This work proposes a block coordinate descent algorithm for parameter estimation in LSR-structured tensor GLMs. Most importantly, it derives a minimax lower bound on the error threshold on estimating the coefficient tensor in LSR tensor GLM problems. The minimax bound is proportional to the intrinsic degrees of freedom in the LSR tensor GLM problem, suggesting that its sample complexity may be significantly lower than that of vectorized GLMs. This result can also be specialised to lower bound the estimation error in CP and Tucker-structured GLMs. The derived bounds are comparable to tight bounds in the literature for Tucker linear regression, and the tightness of the minimax lower bound is further assessed numerically. Finally, numerical experiments on synthetic datasets demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed LSR tensor model for three regression types (linear, logistic and Poisson). Experiments on a collection of medical imaging datasets demonstrate the usefulness of the LSR model over other tensor models (Tucker and CP) on real, imbalanced data with limited available samples. License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Background Ecological communities tend to be spatially structured due to environmental gradients and/or spatially contagious processes such as growth, dispersion and species interactions. Data transformation followed by usage of algorithms such as Redundancy Analysis (RDA) is a fairly common approach in studies searching for spatial structure in ecological communities, despite recent suggestions advocating the use of Generalized Linear Models (GLMs). Here, we compared the performance of GLMs and RDA in describing spatial structure in ecological community composition data. We simulated realistic presence/absence data typical of many β -diversity studies. For model selection we used standard methods commonly used in most studies involving RDA and GLMs. Methods We simulated communities with known spatial structure, based on three real spatial community presence/absence datasets (one terrestrial, one marine and one freshwater). We used spatial eigenvectors as explanatory variables. We varied the number of non-zero coefficients of the spatial variables, and the spatial scales with which these coefficients were associated and then compared the performance of GLMs and RDA frameworks to correctly retrieve the spatial patterns contained in the simulated communities. We used two different methods for model selection, Forward Selection (FW) for RDA and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) for GLMs. The performance of each method was assessed by scoring overall accuracy as the proportion of variables whose inclusion/exclusion status was correct, and by distinguishing which kind of error was observed for each method. We also assessed whether errors in variable selection could affect the interpretation of spatial structure. Results Overall GLM with AIC-based model selection (GLM/AIC) performed better than RDA/FW in selecting spatial explanatory variables, although under some simulations the methods performed similarly. In general, RDA/FW performed unpredictably, often retaining too many explanatory variables and selecting variables associated with incorrect spatial scales. The spatial scale of the pattern had a negligible effect on GLM/AIC performance but consistently affected RDA’s error rates under almost all scenarios. Conclusion We encourage the use of GLM/AIC for studies searching for spatial drivers of species presence/absence patterns, since this framework outperformed RDA/FW in situations most likely to be found in natural communities. It is likely that such recommendations might extend to other types of explanatory variables.more » « less
-
Predictive analytics has been widely used in various domains, including education, to inform decision-making and improve outcomes. However, many predictive models are proprietary and inaccessible for evaluation or modification by researchers and practitioners, limiting their accountability and ethical design. Moreover, predictive models are often opaque and incomprehensible to the officials who use them, reducing their trust and utility. Furthermore, predictive models may introduce or exacerbate bias and inequity, as they have done in many sectors of society. Therefore, there is a need for transparent, interpretable, and fair predictive models that can be easily adopted and adapted by different stakeholders. In this paper, we propose a fair predictive model based on multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) that incorporates fairness measures in the learning process. MARS is a non-parametric regression model that performs feature selection, handles non-linear relationships, generates interpretable decision rules, and derives optimal splitting criteria on the variables. Specifically, we integrate fairness into the knot optimization algorithm and provide theoretical and empirical evidence of how it results in a fair knot placement. We apply our fairMARS model to real-world data and demonstrate its effectiveness in terms of accuracy and equity. Our paper contributes to the advancement of responsible and ethical predictive analytics for social good.
-
Fair representations are a powerful tool for establishing criteria like statistical parity, proxy non-discrimination, and equality of opportunity in learned models. Existing techniques for learning these representations are typically model-agnostic, as they preprocess the original data such that the output satisfies some fairness criterion, and can be used with arbitrary learning methods. In contrast, we demonstrate the promise of learning a model-aware fair representation, focusing on kernel-based models. We leverage the classical Sufficient Dimension Reduction (SDR) framework to construct representations as subspaces of the reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS), whose member functions are guaranteed to satisfy fairness. Our method supports several fairness criteria, continuous and discrete data, and multiple protected attributes. We further show how to calibrate the accuracy tradeoff by characterizing it in terms of the principal angles between subspaces of the RKHS. Finally, we apply our approach to obtain the first Fair Gaussian Process (FGP) prior for fair Bayesian learning, and show that it is competitive with, and in some cases outperforms, state-of-the-art methods on real data.more » « less
-
Recent work in fairness in machine learning has proposed adjusting for fairness by equalizing accuracy metrics across groups and has also studied how datasets affected by historical prejudices may lead to unfair decision policies. We connect these lines of work and study the residual unfairness that arises when a fairness-adjusted predictor is not actually fair on the target population due to systematic censoring of training data by existing biased policies. This scenario is particularly common in the same applications where fairness is a concern. We characterize theoretically the impact of such censoring on standard fairness metrics for binary classifiers and provide criteria for when residual unfairness may or may not appear. We prove that, under certain conditions, fairness-adjusted classifiers will in fact induce residual unfairness that perpetuates the same injustices, against the same groups, that biased the data to begin with, thus showing that even state-of-the-art fair machine learning can have a "bias in, bias out" property. When certain benchmark data is available, we show how sample reweighting can estimate and adjust fairness metrics while accounting for censoring. We use this to study the case of Stop, Question, and Frisk (SQF) and demonstrate that attempting to adjust for fairness perpetuates the same injustices that the policy is infamous for.more » « less