On Prediction-Modelers and Decision-Makers: Why Fairness Requires More Than a Fair Prediction Model
An implicit ambiguity in the field of prediction-based decision-making regards the relation between the concepts of prediction and decision. Much of the literature in the field tends to blur the boundaries between the two concepts and often simply speaks of 'fair prediction.' In this paper, we point out that a differentiation of these concepts is helpful when implementing algorithmic fairness. Even if fairness properties are related to the features of the used prediction model, what is more properly called 'fair' or 'unfair' is a decision system, not a prediction model. This is because fairness is about the consequences on human lives, created by a decision, not by a prediction. We clarify the distinction between the concepts of prediction and decision and show the different ways in which these two elements influence the final fairness properties of a prediction-based decision system. In addition to exploring this relationship conceptually and practically, we propose a framework that enables a better understanding and reasoning of the conceptual logic of creating fairness in prediction-based decision-making. In our framework, we specify different roles, namely the 'prediction-modeler' and the 'decision-maker,' and the information required from each of them for being able to implement fairness of the system. Our framework allows for deriving distinct responsibilities for both roles and discussing some insights related to ethical and legal requirements. Our contribution is twofold. First, we shift the focus from abstract algorithmic fairness to context-dependent decision-making, recognizing diverse actors with unique objectives and independent actions. Second, we provide a conceptual framework that can help structure prediction-based decision problems with respect to fairness issues, identify responsibilities, and implement fairness governance mechanisms in real-world scenarios.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Decision MakingFairnessPredictionMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Joint Optimization of AI Fairness and Utility: A Human-Centered Approach
Today, AI is increasingly being used in many high-stakes decision-making applications in which fairness is an important concern. Already, there are many examples of AI being biased and making questionable and unfair deci…
Decision MakingFairnessAugmented Fairness: An Interpretable Model Augmenting Decision-Makers' Fairness
We propose a model-agnostic approach for mitigating the prediction bias of a black-box decision-maker, and in particular, a human decision-maker. Our method detects in the feature space where the black-box decision-maker…
Active LearningFairnessAuditing the Fairness of the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub's Case Prediction Models
The US COVID-19 Forecast Hub, a repository of COVID-19 forecasts from over 50 independent research groups, is used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for their official COVID-19 communications. As su…
Decision MakingFairness(Un)certainty of (Un)fairness: Preference-Based Selection of Certainly Fair Decision-Makers
Fairness metrics are used to assess discrimination and bias in decision-making processes across various domains, including machine learning models and human decision-makers in real-world applications. This involves calcu…
Decision MakingFairnessCalibrating Predictions to Decisions: A Novel Approach to Multi-Class Calibration
When facing uncertainty, decision-makers want predictions they can trust. A machine learning provider can convey confidence to decision-makers by guaranteeing their predictions are distribution calibrated -- amongst the …
Decision Making