Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3461702.3462603acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaiesConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Measuring Model Fairness under Noisy Covariates: A Theoretical Perspective

Published: 30 July 2021 Publication History

Abstract

In this work we study the problem of measuring the fairness of a machine learning model under noisy information. Focusing on group fairness metrics, we investigate the particular but common situation when the evaluation requires controlling for the confounding effect of covariate variables. In a practical setting, we might not be able to jointly observe the covariate and group information, and a standard workaround is to then use proxies for one or more of these variables. Prior works have demonstrated the challenges with using a proxy for sensitive attributes, and strong independence assumptions are needed to provide guarantees on the accuracy of the noisy estimates. In contrast, in this work we study using a proxy for the covariate variable and present a theoretical analysis that aims to characterize weaker conditions under which accurate fairness evaluation is possible. Furthermore, our theory identifies potential sources of errors and decouples them into two interpretable parts y and E. The first part y depends solely on the performance of the proxy such as precision and recall, whereas the second part E captures correlations between all the variables of interest. We show that in many scenarios the error in the estimates is dominated by y via a linear dependence, whereas the dependence on the correlations E only constitutes a lower order term. As a result we expand the understanding of scenarios where measuring model fairness via proxies can be an effective approach. Finally, we compare, via simulations, the theoretical upper-bounds to the distribution of simulated estimation errors and show that assuming some structure on the data, even weak, is key to significantly improve both theoretical guarantees and empirical results.

References

[1]
Leman Akoglu, Mary McGlohon, and Christos Faloutsos. 2010. Oddball: Spotting anomalies in weighted graphs. In Pacific-Asia conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. Springer, 410--421.
[2]
P. Awasthi, A. Beutel, M. Kleindessner, J. Morgenstern, and X. Wang. 2021. Evaluating Fairness of Machine Learning Models Under Uncertain and Incomplete Information. In ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT).
[3]
S. Barocas, M. Hardt, and A. Narayanan. 2018. Fairness and Machine Learning .fairmlbook.org. http://www.fairmlbook.org.
[4]
Alex Beutel, Jilin Chen, Tulsee Doshi, Hai Qian, Allison Woodruff, Christine Luu, Pierre Kreitmann, Jonathan Bischof, and Ed H Chi. 2019. Putting fairness principles into practice: Challenges, metrics, and improvements. In Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. 453--459.
[5]
Jiahao Chen, Nathan Kallus, Xiaojie Mao, Geoffry Svacha, and Madeleine Udell. 2019 a. Fairness under unawareness: Assessing disparity when protected class is unobserved. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency.
[6]
J. Chen, N. Kallus, X. Mao, G. Svacha, and M. Udell. 2019 b. Fairness Under Unawareness: Assessing Disparity When Protected Class Is Unobserved. In Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (ACM FAT*).
[7]
Alexandra Chouldechova. 2017. Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments. Big data, Vol. 5, 2 (2017), 153--163.
[8]
Sam Corbett-Davies, Emma Pierson, Avi Feller, Sharad Goel, and Aziz Huq. 2017. Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairness. CoRR, Vol. abs/1701.08230 (2017). arxiv: 1701.08230 http://arxiv.org/abs/1701.08230
[9]
Amanda Coston, Karthikeyan N Ramamurthy, Dennis Wei, Kush R Varshney, Skyler Speakman, Zairah Mustahsan, and Supriyo Chakraborty. 2019. Fair Transfer Learning with Missing Protected Attributes. In AAAI / ACM Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, and Society.
[10]
W. Dieterich, C. Mendoza, and T. Brennan. 2016. COMPAS Risk Scales: Demonstrating Accuracy Equity and Predictive Parity. Technical Report. Northpointe Inc. https://www.equivant.com/response-to-propublica-demonstrating-accuracy-equity-and-predictive-parity/.
[11]
Lucas Dixon, John Li, Jeffrey Sorensen, Nithum Thain, and Lucy Vasserman. 2018. Measuring and Mitigating Unintended Bias in Text Classification. In Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (New Orleans, LA, USA) (AIES '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 67--73. https://doi.org/10.1145/3278721.3278729
[12]
Cynthia Dwork, Moritz Hardt, Toniann Pitassi, Omer Reingold, and Richard Zemel. 2012. Fairness through awareness. In Proceedings of the 3rd innovations in theoretical computer science conference. 214--226.
[13]
Riccardo Fogliato, Alexandra Chouldechova, and Max G'Sell. 2020. Fairness Evaluation in Presence of Biased Noisy Labels. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. PMLR, 2325--2336.
[14]
Maya Gupta, Andrew Cotter, Mahdi M Fard, and Serena Wang. 2018. Proxy Fairness. (2018). arXiv:1806.11212 [cs.LG].
[15]
Moritz Hardt, Eric Price, and Nathan Srebro. 2016. Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
[16]
T. Hashimoto, M. Srivastava, H. Namkoong, and P. Liang. 2018. Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimization. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). Code available on https://bit.ly/2sFkDpE.
[17]
Úrsula Hébert-Johnson, Michael P Kim, Omer Reingold, and Guy N Rothblum. 2017. Calibration for the (Computationally-Identifiable) Masses. CoRR abs/1711.08513 (2017). arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.08513 (2017).
[18]
Benjamin Horne and Sibel Adali. 2017. This just in: Fake news packs a lot in title, uses simpler, repetitive content in text body, more similar to satire than real news. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Vol. 11.
[19]
Hossein Hosseini, Sreeram Kannan, Baosen Zhang, and Radha Poovendran. 2017. Deceiving Google's Perspective API Built for Detecting Toxic Comments. CoRR, Vol. abs/1702.08138 (2017). arxiv: 1702.08138 http://arxiv.org/abs/1702.08138
[20]
Heinrich Jiang and Ofir Nachum. 2020. Identifying and correcting label bias in machine learning. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. PMLR, 702--712.
[21]
Nathan Kallus, Xiaojie Mao, and Angela Zhou. 2020. Assessing Algorithmic Fairness with Unobserved Protected Class Using Data Combination. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency.
[22]
Michael Kearns, S. Neel, Roth A., and Z. S. Wu. 2018a. Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairness. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML).
[23]
Michael Kearns, Seth Neel, Aaron Roth, and Zhiwei Steven Wu. 2018b. Preventing fairness gerrymandering: Auditing and learning for subgroup fairness. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2564--2572.
[24]
Niki Kilbertus, Mateo Rojas Carulla, Giambattista Parascandolo, Moritz Hardt, Dominik Janzing, and Bernhard Schölkopf. 2017. Avoiding discrimination through causal reasoning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 656--666.
[25]
Jon Kleinberg, Sendhil Mullainathan, and Manish Raghavan. 2017. Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores. In Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS).
[26]
Srijan Kumar and Neil Shah. 2018. False information on web and social media: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.08559 (2018).
[27]
Aditee Ajit Kumthekar, Aniruddh Nath, Ed H. Chi, Ed H. Chi, Jilin Chen, Li Wei, Lichan Hong, Mahesh Sathiamoorthy, Shawn Andrews, Xinyang Yi, and Zhe Zhao. 2019. Recommending What Video to Watch Next: A Multitask Ranking System.
[28]
Preethi Lahoti, Alex Beutel, Jilin Chen, Kang Lee, Flavien Prost, Nithum Thain, Xuezhi Wang, and Ed H. Chi. 2020. Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted Learning. arxiv: 2006.13114 [cs.LG]
[29]
Alexandre L Lamy, Ziyuan Zhong, Aditya K Menon, and Nakul Verma. 2019. Noise-tolerant fair classification. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
[30]
Hamdy Mubarak, Kareem Darwish, and Walid Magdy. 2017. Abusive Language Detection on Arabic Social Media. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Abusive Language Online. Association for Computational Linguistics, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 52--56. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W17--3008
[31]
Ji Ho Park, Jamin Shin, and Pascale Fung. 2018. Reducing Gender Bias in Abusive Language Detection. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, Brussels, Belgium, 2799--2804. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D18--1302
[32]
Ya'acov Ritov, Yuekai Sun, and Ruofei Zhao. 2017. On conditional parity as a notion of non-discrimination in machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.08519 (2017).
[33]
Martin J Wainwright and Michael Irwin Jordan. 2008. Graphical models, exponential families, and variational inference .Now Publishers Inc.
[34]
Michael Wick, Swetasudha Panda, and Jean-Baptiste Tristan. 2019. Unlocking fairness: a trade-off revisited. (2019).
[35]
Muhammad B Zafar, Isabel Valera, Manuel G Rodriguez, and Krishna Gummadi. 2017. Fairness Constraints: Mechanisms for Fair Classification. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS).

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Fair Transition LossKnowledge-Based Systems10.1016/j.knosys.2024.111711294:COnline publication date: 21-Jun-2024
  • (2023)Weak proxies are sufficient and preferable for fairness with missing sensitive attributesProceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning10.5555/3618408.3620230(43258-43288)Online publication date: 23-Jul-2023
  • (2023)Predicting and Understanding Student Learning Performance Using Multi-Source Sparse Attention Convolutional Neural NetworksIEEE Transactions on Big Data10.1109/TBDATA.2021.31252049:1(118-132)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Measuring Model Fairness under Noisy Covariates: A Theoretical Perspective

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    AIES '21: Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
    July 2021
    1077 pages
    ISBN:9781450384735
    DOI:10.1145/3461702
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 30 July 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. ml fairness
    2. noisy covariates
    3. statistical parity

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    AIES '21
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 61 of 162 submissions, 38%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)100
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12
    Reflects downloads up to 26 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Fair Transition LossKnowledge-Based Systems10.1016/j.knosys.2024.111711294:COnline publication date: 21-Jun-2024
    • (2023)Weak proxies are sufficient and preferable for fairness with missing sensitive attributesProceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning10.5555/3618408.3620230(43258-43288)Online publication date: 23-Jul-2023
    • (2023)Predicting and Understanding Student Learning Performance Using Multi-Source Sparse Attention Convolutional Neural NetworksIEEE Transactions on Big Data10.1109/TBDATA.2021.31252049:1(118-132)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2023
    • (2022)Unsupervised and Semi-supervised Bias Benchmarking in Face RecognitionComputer Vision – ECCV 202210.1007/978-3-031-19778-9_17(289-306)Online publication date: 23-Oct-2022

    View Options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Login options

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media