An official website of the United States government
In this paper, we interrogate whether data quality issues track demographic characteristics such as sex, race and age, and whether automated data cleaning — of the kind commonly used in production ML systems — impacts the fairness of predictions made by these systems. To the best of our knowledge, the impact of data cleaning on fairness in downstream tasks has not been investigated in the literature.We first analyze the tuples flagged by common error detection strategies in five research datasets. We find that, while specific data quality issues, such as higher rates of missing values, are associated with membership in historically disadvantaged groups, poor data quality does not generally track demographic group membership. As a follow-up, we conduct a large-scale empirical study on the impact of automated data cleaning on fairness, involving more than 26,000 model evaluations on five datasets. We observe that, while automated data cleaning has an insignificant impact on both accuracy and fairness in the majority of cases, it is more likely to worsen fairness than to improve it, especially when the cleaning techniques are not carefully chosen. This finding is both significant and worrying, given that it potentially implicates many production ML systems. We make our code and experimental results publicly available.The analysis we conducted in this paper is difficult, primarily because it requires that we think holistically about disparities in data quality, disparities in the effectiveness of data cleaning methods, and impacts of such disparities on ML model performance for different demographic groups. Such holistic analysis can and should be supported with the help of data engineering research. Towards this goal, we envision the development of fairness-aware data cleaning methods, and their integration into complex pipelines for ML-based decision making.
more »
« less
Automated Data Cleaning Can Hurt Fairness in Machine Learning-based Decision Making
In this paper, we interrogate whether data quality issues track demographic group membership (based on sex, race and age) and whether automated data cleaning — of the kind commonly used in production ML systems — impacts the fairness of predictions made by these systems. To the best of our knowledge, the impact of data cleaning on fairness in downstream tasks has not been investigated in the literature. We first analyse the tuples flagged by common error detection strategies in five research datasets. We find that, while specific data quality issues, such as higher rates of missing values, are associated with membership in historically disadvantaged groups, poor data quality does not generally track demographic group membership. As a follow-up, we conduct a large-scale empirical study on the impact of automated data cleaning on fairness, involving more than 26,000 model evaluations. We observe that, while automated data cleaning is unlikely to worsen accuracy, it is more likely to worsen fairness than to improve it, especially when the cleaning techniques are not carefully chosen. Furthermore, we find that the positive or negative impact of a particular cleaning technique often depends on the choice of fairness metric and group definition (single-attribute or intersectional). We make our code and experimental results publicly available. The analysis we conducted in this paper is difficult, primarily because it requires that we think holistically about disparities in data quality, disparities in the effectiveness of data cleaning methods, and impacts of such disparities on ML model performance for different demographic groups. Such holistic analysis can and should be supported by data engineering tools, and requires substantial data engineering research. Towards this goal, we discuss open research questions, envision the development of fairness-aware data cleaning methods, and their integration into complex pipelines for ML-based decision making.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10514470
- Publisher / Repository:
- IEEE Explore
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
- ISSN:
- 1041-4347
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 12
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- responsible AI data engineering data cleaning data quality algorithmic fairness
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Classification of patient multicategory survival outcomes is important for personalized cancer treatments. Machine learning (ML) algorithms have increasingly been used to inform healthcare decisions, but these models are vulnerable to biases in data collection and algorithm creation. ML models have previously been shown to exhibit racial bias, but their fairness towards patients from different age and sex groups have yet to be studied. Therefore, we compared the multimetric performances of five ML models (random forests, multinomial logistic regression, linear support vector classifier, linear discriminant analysis, and multilayer perceptron) when classifying colorectal cancer patients (n = 589) of various age, sex, and racial groups using The Cancer Genome Atlas data. All five models exhibited biases for these sociodemographic groups. We then repeated the same process on lung adenocarcinoma (n = 515) to validate our findings. Surprisingly, most models tended to perform more poorly overall for the largest sociodemographic groups. Methods to optimize model performance, including testing the model on merged age, sex, or racial groups, and creating a model trained on and used for an individual or merged sociodemographic group, show potential to reduce disparities in model performance for different groups. This is supported by our regression analysis showing associations between model choice and methodology used with reduced performance disparities across demographic subgroups. Notably, these methods may be used to improve ML fairness while avoiding penalizing the model for exhibiting bias and thus sacrificing overall performance.more » « less
-
Breast cancer is the leading cancer affecting women globally. Despite deep learning models making significant strides in diagnosing and treating this disease, ensuring fair outcomes across diverse populations presents a challenge, particularly when certain demographic groups are underrepresented in training datasets. Addressing the fairness of AI models across varied demographic backgrounds is crucial. This study analyzes demographic representation within the publicly accessible Emory Breast Imaging Dataset (EMBED), which includes de-identified mammography and clinical data. We spotlight the data disparities among racial and ethnic groups and assess the biases in mammography image classification models trained on this dataset, specifically ResNet-50 and Swin Transformer V2. Our evaluation of classification accuracies across these groups reveals significant variations in model performance, highlighting concerns regarding the fairness of AI diagnostic tools. This paper emphasizes the imperative need for fairness in AI and suggests directions for future research aimed at increasing the inclusiveness and dependability of these technologies in healthcare settings. Code is available at: https://github.com/kuanhuang0624/EMBEDFairModels.more » « less
-
Current algorithmic fairness tools focus on auditing completed models, neglecting the potential downstream impacts of iterative decisions about cleaning data and training machine learning models. In response, we developed Retrograde, a JupyterLab environment extension for Python that generates real-time, contextual notifications for data scientists about decisions they are making regarding protected classes, proxy variables, missing data, and demographic differences in model performance. Our novel framework uses automated code analysis to trace data provenance in JupyterLab, enabling these notifications. In a between-subjects online experiment, 51 data scientists constructed loan-decision models with Retrograde providing notifications continuously throughout the process, only at the end, or never. Retrograde’s notifications successfully nudged participants to account for missing data, avoid using protected classes as predictors, minimize demographic differences in model performance, and exhibit healthy skepticism about their models.more » « less
-
Structured data-quality issues—such as missing values correlated with demographics, culturally biased labels, or systemic selection biases—routinely degrade the reliability of machine-learning pipelines. Regulators now increasingly demand evidence that high-stakes systems can withstand these realistic, interdependent errors, yet current robustness evaluations typically use random or overly simplistic corruptions, leaving worst-case scenarios unexplored. We introduce Savage, a causally inspired framework that (i) formally models realistic data-quality issues through dependency graphs and flexible corruption templates, and (ii) systematically discovers corruption patterns that maximally degrade a target performance metric. Savage employs a bi-level optimization approach to efficiently identify vulnerable data subpopulations and fine-tune corruption severity, treating the full ML pipeline, including preprocessing and potentially non-differentiable models, as a black box. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets and ML tasks (data cleaning, fairness-aware learning, uncertainty quantification) demonstrate that even a small fraction (around 5%) of structured corruptions identified by Savage severely impacts model performance, far exceeding random or manually crafted errors, and invalidating core assumptions of existing techniques. Thus, Savage provides a practical tool for rigorous pipeline stress-testing, a benchmark for evaluating robustness methods, and actionable guidance for designing more resilient data workflows.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2024.3365524
