FACT: A Diagnostic for Group Fairness Trade-offs
Group fairness, a class of fairness notions that measure how different groups of individuals are treated differently according to their protected attributes, has been shown to conflict with one another, often with a necessary cost in loss of model's predictive performance. We propose a general diagnostic that enables systematic characterization of these trade-offs in group fairness. We observe that the majority of group fairness notions can be expressed via the fairness-confusion tensor, which is the confusion matrix split according to the protected attribute values. We frame several optimization problems that directly optimize both accuracy and fairness objectives over the elements of this tensor, which yield a general perspective for understanding multiple trade-offs including group fairness incompatibilities. It also suggests an alternate post-processing method for designing fair classifiers. On synthetic and real datasets, we demonstrate the use cases of our diagnostic, particularly on understanding the trade-off landscape between accuracy and fairness.
Code (1)
Tasks
AttributeDiagnosticFairnessSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
FGCE: Feasible Group Counterfactual Explanations for Auditing Fairness
This paper introduces the first graph-based framework for generating group counterfactual explanations to audit model fairness, a crucial aspect of trustworthy machine learning. Counterfactual explanations are instrument…
counterfactualFairnessModel-Agnostic Characterization of Fairness Trade-offs
There exist several inherent trade-offs while designing a fair model, such as those between the model’s predictive accuracy and fairness, or even among different notions of fairness. In practice, exploring these trade-o…
DiagnosticFairnessmodelA Unified Approach to Quantifying Algorithmic Unfairness: Measuring Individual & Group Unfairness via Inequality Indices
Discrimination via algorithmic decision making has received considerable attention. Prior work largely focuses on defining conditions for fairness, but does not define satisfactory measures of algorithmic unfairness. In …
Decision MakingFairnessFairly Accurate: Learning Optimal Accuracy vs. Fairness Tradeoffs for Hate Speech Detection
Recent work has emphasized the importance of balancing competing objectives in model training (e.g., accuracy vs. fairness, or competing measures of fairness). Such trade-offs reflect a broader class of multi-objective o…
FairnessHate Speech DetectionUtility-Fairness Trade-Offs and How to Find Them
When building classification systems with demographic fairness considerations, there are two objectives to satisfy: 1) maximizing utility for the specific task and 2) ensuring fairness w.r.t. a known demographic attribut…
AttributeFairnessRepresentation Learning