Accurate Fairness: Improving Individual Fairness without Trading Accuracy
Accuracy and individual fairness are both crucial for trustworthy machine learning, but these two aspects are often incompatible with each other so that enhancing one aspect may sacrifice the other inevitably with side effects of true bias or false fairness. We propose in this paper a new fairness criterion, accurate fairness, to align individual fairness with accuracy. Informally, it requires the treatments of an individual and the individual's similar counterparts to conform to a uniform target, i.e., the ground truth of the individual. We prove that accurate fairness also implies typical group fairness criteria over a union of similar sub-populations. We then present a Siamese fairness in-processing approach to minimize the accuracy and fairness losses of a machine learning model under the accurate fairness constraints. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that a Siamese approach is adapted for bias mitigation. We also propose fairness confusion matrix-based metrics, fair-precision, fair-recall, and fair-F1 score, to quantify a trade-off between accuracy and individual fairness. Comparative case studies with popular fairness datasets show that our Siamese fairness approach can achieve on average 1.02%-8.78% higher individual fairness (in terms of fairness through awareness) and 8.38%-13.69% higher accuracy, as well as 10.09%-20.57% higher true fair rate, and 5.43%-10.01% higher fair-F1 score, than the state-of-the-art bias mitigation techniques. This demonstrates that our Siamese fairness approach can indeed improve individual fairness without trading accuracy. Finally, the accurate fairness criterion and Siamese fairness approach are applied to mitigate the possible service discrimination with a real Ctrip dataset, by on average fairly serving 112.33% more customers (specifically, 81.29% more customers in an accurately fair way) than baseline models.
Code (1)
Tasks
BIG-bench Machine LearningFairnessMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Fairness in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning for Stock Trading
Unfair stock trading strategies have been shown to be one of the most negative perceptions that customers can have concerning trading and may result in long-term losses for a company. Investment banks usually place tradi…
FairnessMulti-agent Reinforcement Learningreinforcement-learningReinforcement Learning+1The Double-Edged Sword of Input Perturbations to Robust Accurate Fairness
Deep neural networks (DNNs) are known to be sensitive to adversarial input perturbations, leading to a reduction in either prediction accuracy or individual fairness. To jointly characterize the susceptibility of predict…
Adversarial AttackFairnessWithin-group fairness: A guidance for more sound between-group fairness
As they have a vital effect on social decision-making, AI algorithms not only should be accurate and but also should not pose unfairness against certain sensitive groups (e.g., non-white, women). Various specially design…
Decision MakingFairnessPersonalizing Fairness-aware Re-ranking
Personalized recommendation brings about novel challenges in ensuring fairness, especially in scenarios in which users are not the only stakeholders involved in the recommender system. For example, the system may want to…
DiversityFairnessRecommendation SystemsRe-RankingCorrect-By-Construction: Certified Individual Fairness through Neural Network Training
Fairness in machine learning is more important than ever as ethical concerns continue to grow. Individual fairness demands that individuals differing only in sensitive attributes receive the same outcomes. However, commo…