The Illusion of Fairness: Auditing Fairness Interventions with Audit Studies
Artificial intelligence systems, especially those using machine learning, are being deployed in domains from hiring to loan issuance in order to automate these complex decisions. Judging both the effectiveness and fairness of these AI systems, and their human decision making counterpart, is a complex and important topic studied across both computational and social sciences. Within machine learning, a common way to address bias in downstream classifiers is to resample the training data to offset disparities. For example, if hiring rates vary by some protected class, then one may equalize the rate within the training set to alleviate bias in the resulting classifier. While simple and seemingly effective, these methods have typically only been evaluated using data obtained through convenience samples, introducing selection bias and label bias into metrics. Within the social sciences, psychology, public health, and medicine, audit studies, in which fictitious ``testers'' (e.g., resumes, emails, patient actors) are sent to subjects (e.g., job openings, businesses, doctors) in randomized control trials, provide high quality data that support rigorous estimates of discrimination. In this paper, we investigate how data from audit studies can be used to improve our ability to both train and evaluate automated hiring algorithms. We find that such data reveals cases where the common fairness intervention method of equalizing base rates across classes appears to achieve parity using traditional measures, but in fact has roughly 10% disparity when measured appropriately. We additionally introduce interventions based on individual treatment effect estimation methods that further reduce algorithmic discrimination using this data.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Decision MakingSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Exposing the Illusion of Fairness: Auditing Vulnerabilities to Distributional Manipulation Attacks
The rapid deployment of AI systems in high-stakes domains, including those classified as high-risk under the The EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), has intensified the need for reliable compliance auditing. For binar…
Bias DetectionAuditing Fairness-Privacy Trade-offs: Subpopulation-Level Effects of Fairness-Enhancing Algorithms
Machine learning (ML) models deployed in sensitive domains such as healthcare, law enforcement, and finance must satisfy not only utility requirements but also fairness and privacy guarantees. While prior work has largel…
Fairness Auditing: Lower Bounds on Company Manipulation
Fairness audits are increasingly mandated in high-stakes applications such as hiring, lending, and automated decision-making. Recent work has established fundamental impossibility results for black-box fairness auditing,…
Faking Fairness via Stealthily Biased Sampling
Auditing fairness of decision-makers is now in high demand. To respond to this social demand, several fairness auditing tools have been developed. The focus of this study is to raise an awareness of the risk of malicious…
FairnessAudit Me If You Can: Query-Efficient Active Fairness Auditing of Black-Box LLMs
Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit systematic biases across demographic groups. Auditing is proposed as an accountability tool for black-box LLM applications, but suffers from resource-intensive query access. We concep…