When Interpretability Is Unequally Distributed: Fairness in Hybrid Interpretable Models
Hybrid interpretable models combine a transparent component with a black-box model by assigning some examples to the former and deferring the rest to the latter. While this design enables flexible tradeoffs between accuracy and interpretability, it also raises a distinct procedural fairness concern: some demographic groups may systematically receive interpretable decisions, while others are disproportionately routed to a black box. We formalize this issue as Interpretability Coverage Disparity (ICD), a demographic-parity-style measure applied to the routing decision of hybrid interpretable models. Using tools from predictive multiplicity, we study ICD across four hybrid interpretable learning methods, three standard fairness benchmark datasets, and multiple sensitive attributes. Our experiments reveal substantial ICD in intermediate transparency regimes, where both the interpretable and black-box components are actively used. We further show that simple coverage-disparity constraints can significantly reduce ICD in exact hybrid learning methods, with marginal impact on accuracy and sparsity. In several settings, ICD mitigation also improves standard algorithmic fairness metrics. These results show that hybrid interpretable models should be audited not only for predictive fairness, but also for how they allocate interpretability across individuals and groups.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Fair and Efficient Distributed Edge Learning with Hybrid Multipath TCP
The bottleneck of distributed edge learning (DEL) over wireless has shifted from computing to communication, primarily the aggregation-averaging (Agg-Avg) process of DEL. The existing transmission control protocol (TCP)-…
AvgDeep Reinforcement LearningFairnessWhat Is the Point of Equality in Machine Learning Fairness? Beyond Equality of Opportunity
Fairness in machine learning (ML) has become a rapidly growing area of research. But why, in the first place, is unfairness in ML morally wrong? And why should we care about improving fairness? Most fair-ML research impl…
FairnessPhilosophyFairness Under Group-Conditional Prior Probability Shift: Invariance, Drift, and Target-Aware Post-Processing
Machine learning systems are often trained and evaluated for fairness on historical data, yet deployed in environments where conditions have shifted. A particularly common form of shift occurs when the prevalence of posi…
On User-side Fairness in Negative Sampling for Recommender Systems
Recommender systems are usually trained to discern between positive and negative instances for each user. Negative sampling plays an important role in selecting informative negative items. Since positive data is dispropo…
FairnessRecommendation SystemsCausal Fair Machine Learning via Rank-Preserving Interventional Distributions
A decision can be defined as fair if equal individuals are treated equally and unequals unequally. Adopting this definition, the task of designing machine learning (ML) models that mitigate unfairness in automated decisi…
AttributeDecision Makingquantile regression