An official website of the United States government
Recent years have witnessed increasing concerns towards unfair decisions made by machine learning algorithms. To improve fairness in model decisions, various fairness notions have been proposed and many fairness-aware methods are developed. However, most of existing definitions and methods focus only on single-label classification. Fairness for multi-label classification, where each instance is associated with more than one labels, is still yet to establish. To fill this gap, we study fairness-aware multi-label classification in this paper. We start by extending Demographic Parity (DP) and Equalized Opportunity (EOp), two popular fairness notions, to multi-label classification scenarios. Through a systematic study, we show that on multi-label data, because of unevenly distributed labels, EOp usually fails to construct a reliable estimate on labels with few instances. We then propose a new framework named Similarity s-induced Fairness (sγ -SimFair). This new framework utilizes data that have similar labels when estimating fairness on a particular label group for better stability, and can unify DP and EOp. Theoretical analysis and experimental results on real-world datasets together demonstrate the advantage of sγ -SimFair over existing methods on multi-label classification tasks.
more »
« less
Generalizing Group Fairness in Machine Learning via Utilities
Group fairness definitions such as Demographic Parity and Equal Opportunity make assumptions about the underlying decision-problem that restrict them to classification problems. Prior work has translated these definitions to other machine learning environments, such as unsupervised learning and reinforcement learning, by implementing their closest mathematical equivalent. As a result, there are numerous bespoke interpretations of these definitions. This work aims to unify the shared aspects of each of these bespoke definitions, and to this end we provide a group fairness framework that generalizes beyond just classification problems. We leverage two fairness principles that enable this generalization. First, our framework measures outcomes in terms of utilities, rather than predictions, and does so for both the decision-maker and the individual. Second, our framework can consider counterfactual outcomes, rather than just observed outcomes, thus preventing loopholes where fairness criteria are satisfied through self-fulfilling prophecies. We provide concrete examples of how our utility fairness framework avoids these assumptions and thus naturally integrates with classification, clustering, and reinforcement learning fairness problems. We also show that many of the bespoke interpretations of Demographic Parity and Equal Opportunity fit nicely as special cases of our framework.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1939743
- PAR ID:
- 10486305
- Publisher / Repository:
- AI Access Foundation
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
- Volume:
- 78
- ISSN:
- 1076-9757
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 747 to 780
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)We mathematically compare four competing definitions of group-level nondiscrimination: demographic parity, equalized odds, predictive parity, and calibration. Using the theoretical framework of Friedler et al., we study the properties of each definition under various worldviews, which are assumptions about how, if at all, the observed data is biased. We argue that different worldviews call for different definitions of fairness, and we specify the worldviews that, when combined with the desire to avoid a criterion for discrimination that we call disparity amplification, motivate demographic parity and equalized odds. We also argue that predictive parity and calibration are insufficient for avoiding disparity amplification because predictive parity allows an arbitrarily large inter-group disparity and calibration is not robust to post-processing. Finally, we define a worldview that is more realistic than the previously considered ones, and we introduce a new notion of fairness that corresponds to this worldview.more » « less
-
Despite the success of large-scale empirical risk minimization (ERM) at achieving high accuracy across a variety of machine learning tasks, fair ERM is hindered by the incompatibility of fairness constraints with stochastic optimization. We consider the problem of fair classification with discrete sensitive attributes and potentially large models and data sets, requiring stochastic solvers. Existing in-processing fairness algorithms are either impractical in the large-scale setting because they require large batches of data at each iteration or they are not guaranteed to converge. In this paper, we develop the first stochastic in-processing fairness algorithm with guaranteed convergence. For demographic parity, equalized odds, and equal opportunity notions of fairness, we provide slight variations of our algorithm–called FERMI–and prove that each of these variations converges in stochastic optimization with any batch size. Empirically, we show that FERMI is amenable to stochastic solvers with multiple (non-binary) sensitive attributes and non-binary targets, performing well even with minibatch size as small as one. Extensive experiments show that FERMI achieves the most favorable tradeoffs between fairness violation and test accuracy across all tested setups compared with state-of-the-art baselines for demographic parity, equalized odds, equal opportunity. These benefits are especially significant with small batch sizes and for non-binary classification with large number of sensitive attributes, making FERMI a practical, scalable fairness algorithm. The code for all of the experiments in this paper is available at: https://github.com/optimization-for-data-driven-science/FERMI.more » « less
-
Algorithmic fairness is becoming increasingly important in data mining and machine learning. Among others, a foundational notation is group fairness. The vast majority of the existing works on group fairness, with a few exceptions, primarily focus on debiasing with respect to a single sensitive attribute, despite the fact that the co-existence of multiple sensitive attributes (e.g., gender, race, marital status, etc.) in the real-world is commonplace. As such, methods that can ensure a fair learning outcome with respect to all sensitive attributes of concern simultaneously need to be developed. In this paper, we study the problem of information-theoretic intersectional fairness (InfoFair), where statistical parity, a representative group fairness measure, is guaranteed among demographic groups formed by multiple sensitive attributes of interest. We formulate it as a mutual information minimization problem and propose a generic end-to-end algorithmic framework to solve it. The key idea is to leverage a variational representation of mutual information, which considers the variational distribution between learning outcomes and sensitive attributes, as well as the density ratio between the variational and the original distributions. Our proposed framework is generalizable to many different settings, including other statistical notions of fairness, and could handle any type of learning task equipped with a gradientbased optimizer. Empirical evaluations in the fair classification task on three real-world datasets demonstrate that our proposed framework can effectively debias the classification results with minimal impact to the classification accuracy.more » « less
-
Given an algorithmic predictor that is "fair" on some source distribution, will it still be fair on an unknown target distribution that differs from the source within some bound? In this paper, we study the transferability of statistical group fairness for machine learning predictors (i.e., classifiers or regressors) subject to bounded distribution shifts. Such shifts may be introduced by initial training data uncertainties, user adaptation to a deployed predictor, dynamic environments, or the use of pre-trained models in new settings. Herein, we develop a bound that characterizes such transferability, flagging potentially inappropriate deployments of machine learning for socially consequential tasks. We first develop a framework for bounding violations of statistical fairness subject to distribution shift, formulating a generic upper bound for transferred fairness violations as our primary result. We then develop bounds for specific worked examples, focusing on two commonly used fairness definitions (i.e., demographic parity and equalized odds) and two classes of distribution shift (i.e., covariate shift and label shift). Finally, we compare our theoretical bounds to deterministic models of distribution shift and against real-world data, finding that we are able to estimate fairness violation bounds in practice, even when simplifying assumptions are only approximately satisfied.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.14238
