Does mitigating ML's impact disparity require treatment disparity?
Following related work in law and policy, two notions of disparity have come to shape the study of fairness in algorithmic decision-making. Algorithms exhibit treatment disparity if they formally treat members of protected subgroups differently; algorithms exhibit impact disparity when outcomes differ across subgroups, even if the correlation arises unintentionally. Naturally, we can achieve impact parity through purposeful treatment disparity. In one thread of technical work, papers aim to reconcile the two forms of parity proposing disparate learning processes (DLPs). Here, the learning algorithm can see group membership during training but produce a classifier that is group-blind at test time. In this paper, we show theoretically that: (i) When other features correlate to group membership, DLPs will (indirectly) implement treatment disparity, undermining the policy desiderata they are designed to address; (ii) When group membership is partly revealed by other features, DLPs induce within-class discrimination; and (iii) In general, DLPs provide a suboptimal trade-off between accuracy and impact parity. Based on our technical analysis, we argue that transparent treatment disparity is preferable to occluded methods for achieving impact parity. Experimental results on several real-world datasets highlight the practical consequences of applying DLPs vs. per-group thresholds.
Code (1)
Tasks
Decision MakingFairnessSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Spurious Privacy Leakage in Neural Networks
Neural networks are vulnerable to privacy attacks aimed at stealing sensitive data. The risks can be amplified in a real-world scenario, particularly when models are trained on limited and biased data. In this work, we i…
MemorizationQuantifying and mitigating the impact of label errors on model disparity metrics
Errors in labels obtained via human annotation adversely affect a model's performance. Existing approaches propose ways to mitigate the effect of label error on a model's downstream accuracy, yet little is known about it…
A Causal Framework to Measure and Mitigate Non-binary Treatment Discrimination
Fairness studies of algorithmic decision-making systems often simplify complex decision processes, such as bail or loan approvals, into binary classification tasks. However, these approaches overlook that such decisions …
Binary ClassificationcounterfactualCounterfactual ReasoningDecision Making+1Tracking and Improving Information in the Service of Fairness
As algorithmic prediction systems have become widespread, fears that these systems may inadvertently discriminate against members of underrepresented populations have grown. With the goal of understanding fundamental pri…
Decision MakingFairnessInformativenessMinimax Optimal Fair Classification with Bounded Demographic Disparity
Mitigating the disparate impact of statistical machine learning methods is crucial for ensuring fairness. While extensive research aims to reduce disparity, the effect of using a \emph{finite dataset} -- as opposed to th…
Binary ClassificationClassificationFairness