Fairness in Algorithmic Recourse Through the Lens of Substantive Equality of Opportunity
Algorithmic recourse -- providing recommendations to those affected negatively by the outcome of an algorithmic system on how they can take action and change that outcome -- has gained attention as a means of giving persons agency in their interactions with artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Recent work has shown that even if an AI decision-making classifier is ``fair'' (according to some reasonable criteria), recourse itself may be unfair due to differences in the initial circumstances of individuals, compounding disparities for marginalized populations and requiring them to exert more effort than others. There is a need to define more methods and metrics for evaluating fairness in recourse that span a range of normative views of the world, and specifically those that take into account time. Time is a critical element in recourse because the longer it takes an individual to act, the more the setting may change due to model or data drift. This paper seeks to close this research gap by proposing two notions of fairness in recourse that are in normative alignment with substantive equality of opportunity, and that consider time. The first considers the (often repeated) effort individuals exert per successful recourse event, and the second considers time per successful recourse event. Building upon an agent-based framework for simulating recourse, this paper demonstrates how much effort is needed to overcome disparities in initial circumstances. We then proposes an intervention to improve the fairness of recourse by rewarding effort, and compare it to existing strategies.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Decision MakingFairnessSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Escaping the Impossibility of Fairness: From Formal to Substantive Algorithmic Fairness
Efforts to promote equitable public policy with algorithms appear to be fundamentally constrained by the "impossibility of fairness" (an incompatibility between mathematical definitions of fairness). This technical limit…
Decision MakingFairnessPhilosophyRAGUEL: Recourse-Aware Group Unfairness Elimination
While machine learning and ranking-based systems are in widespread use for sensitive decision-making processes (e.g., determining job candidates, assigning credit scores), they are rife with concerns over unintended bias…
AttributecounterfactualDecision MakingFairness+1On the Fairness of Causal Algorithmic Recourse
Algorithmic fairness is typically studied from the perspective of predictions. Instead, here we investigate fairness from the perspective of recourse actions suggested to individuals to remedy an unfavourable classificat…
counterfactualFairnessToward Substantive Intersectional Algorithmic Fairness: Desiderata for a Feminist Approach
People's experiences of discrimination are often shaped by multiple intersecting factors, yet algorithmic fairness research rarely reflects this complexity. While intersectionality offers tools for understanding how form…
Robustness Implies Fairness in Causal Algorithmic Recourse
Algorithmic recourse aims to disclose the inner workings of the black-box decision process in situations where decisions have significant consequences, by providing recommendations to empower beneficiaries to achieve a m…
Adversarial RobustnessFairness