An official website of the United States government
Making fair decisions is crucial to ethically implementing machine learning algorithms in social settings. In this work, we consider the celebrated definition of counterfactual fairness. We begin by showing that an algorithm which satisfies counterfactual fairness also satisfies demographic parity, a far simpler fairness constraint. Similarly, we show that all algorithms satisfying demographic parity can be trivially modified to satisfy counterfactual fairness. Together, our results indicate that counterfactual fairness is basically equivalent to demographic parity, which has important implications for the growing body of work on counterfactual fairness. We then validate our theoretical findings empirically, analyzing three existing algorithms for counterfactual fairness against three simple benchmarks. We find that two simple benchmark algorithms outperform all three existing algorithms---in terms of fairness, accuracy, and efficiency---on several data sets. Our analysis leads us to formalize a concrete fairness goal: to preserve the order of individuals within protected groups. We believe transparency around the ordering of individuals within protected groups makes fair algorithms more trustworthy. By design, the two simple benchmark algorithms satisfy this goal while the existing algorithms do not.
more »
« less
Fairness in Large Language Models: A Taxonomic Survey
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable success across various domains. However, despite their promising performance in numerous real-world applications, most of these algorithms lack fairness considerations. Consequently, they may lead to discriminatory outcomes against certain communities, particularly marginalized populations, prompting extensive study in fair LLMs. On the other hand, fairness in LLMs, in contrast to fairness in traditional machine learning, entails exclusive backgrounds, taxonomies, and fulfillment techniques. To this end, this survey presents a comprehensive overview of recent advances in the existing literature concerning fair LLMs. Specifically, a brief introduction to LLMs is provided, followed by an analysis of factors contributing to bias in LLMs. Additionally, the concept of fairness in LLMs is discussed categorically, summarizing metrics for evaluating bias in LLMs and existing algorithms for promoting fairness. Furthermore, resources for evaluating bias in LLMs, including toolkits and datasets, are summarized. Finally, existing research challenges and open questions are discussed.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2404039
- PAR ID:
- 10600079
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter
- Volume:
- 26
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 1931-0145
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 34 to 48
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
We present FairRankTune, a multi-purpose open-source Python toolkit offering three primary services: quantifying fairness-related harms, leveraging bias mitigation algorithms, and constructing custom fairness-relevant datasets. FairRankTune provides researchers and practitioners with a self-contained resource for fairness auditing, experimentation, and advancing research. The central piece of FairRankTune is a novel fairness-tunable ranked data generator, RankTune, that streamlines the creation of custom fairness-relevant ranked datasets. FairRankTune also offers numerous fair ranking metrics and fairness-aware ranking algorithms within the same plug-and-play package. We demonstrate the key innovations of FairRankTune, focusing on features that are valuable to stakeholders via use cases highlighting workflows in the end-to-end process of mitigating bias in ranking systems. FairRankTune addresses the gap of limited publicly available datasets, auditing tools, and implementations for fair ranking.more » « less
-
Although machine learning (ML) algorithms are widely used to make decisions about individuals in various domains, concerns have arisen that (1) these algorithms are vulnerable to strategic manipulation and "gaming the algorithm"; and (2) ML decisions may exhibit bias against certain social groups. Existing works have largely examined these as two separate issues, e.g., by focusing on building ML algorithms robust to strategic manipulation, or on training a fair ML algorithm. In this study, we set out to understand the impact they each have on the other, and examine how to characterize fair policies in the presence of strategic behavior. The strategic interaction between a decision maker and individuals (as decision takers) is modeled as a two-stage (Stackelberg) game; when designing an algorithm, the former anticipates the latter may manipulate their features in order to receive more favorable decisions. We analytically characterize the equilibrium strategies of both, and examine how the algorithms and their resulting fairness properties are affected when the decision maker is strategic (anticipates manipulation), as well as the impact of fairness interventions on equilibrium strategies. In particular, we identify conditions under which anticipation of strategic behavior may mitigate/exacerbate unfairness, and conditions under which fairness interventions can serve as (dis)incentives for strategic manipulation.more » « less
-
Rated preference aggregation is conventionally performed by averaging ratings from multiple evaluators to create a consensus ordering of candidates from highest to lowest average rating. Ideally, the consensus is fair, meaning critical opportunities are not withheld from marginalized groups of candidates, even if group biases may be present in the to-be-combined ratings. Prior work operationalizing fairness in preference aggregation is limited to settings where evaluators provide rankings of candidates (e.g., Joe > Jack > Jill). Yet, in practice, many evaluators assign ratings such as Likert scales or categories (e.g., yes, no, maybe) to each candidate. Ratings convey different information than rankings leading to distinct fairness issues during their aggregation. The existing literature does not characterize these fairness concerns nor provide applicable bias-mitigation solutions. Unlike the ranked setting studied previously, two unique forms of bias arise in rating aggregation. First, biased rating stems from group disparities in to-be-aggregated evaluator ratings. Second, biased tie-breaking occurs because ties in average ratings must be resolved when aggregating ratings into a consensus ranking, and this tie-breaking act can unfairly advantage certain groups. To address this gap, we define the open fair rated preference aggregation problem and introduce the corresponding Fate methodology. Fate offers the first group fairness metric specifically for rated preference data. We propose two Fate algorithms. Fate-Break works in settings when ties need to be broken, explicitly fairness-enhancing such processes without lowering consensus utility. Fate-Rate mitigates disparities in how groups are rated, by using a Markov-chain approach to generate outcomes where groups are, in as much as possible, equally represented. Our experimental study illustrates the FATE methods provide the most bias-mitigation compared to adapting prior methods to fair tie-breaking and rating aggregation.more » « less
-
Machine Learning (ML) algorithms are increasingly used in our daily lives, yet often exhibit discrimination against protected groups. In this talk, I discuss the growing concern of bias in ML and overview existing approaches to address fairness issues. Then, I present three novel approaches developed by my research group. The first leverages generative AI to eliminate biases in training datasets, the second tackles non-convex problems arise in fair learning, and the third introduces a matrix decomposition-based post-processing approach to identify and eliminate unfair model components.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3682112.3682117
