Abstract:Fairness measurement is crucial for assessing algorithmic bias in various types of machine learning (ML) models, including ones used for search relevance, recommendation, personalization, talent analytics, and natural language processing. However, the fairness measurement paradigm is currently dominated by fairness metrics that examine disparities in allocation and/or prediction error as univariate key performance indicators (KPIs) for a protected attribute or group. Although important and effective in assessing ML bias in certain contexts such as recidivism, existing metrics don’t work well in many real-world applications of ML characterized by imperfect models applied to an array of instances encompassing a multivariate mixture of protected attributes, that are part of a broader process pipeline. Consequently, the upstream representational harm quantified by existing metrics based on how the model represents protected groups doesn’t necessarily relate to allocational harm in the application of such models in downstream policy/decision contexts. We propose FAIR-Frame, a model-based framework for parsimoniously modeling fairness across multiple protected attributes in regard to the representational and allocational harm associated with the upstream design/development and downstream usage of ML models. We evaluate the efficacy of our proposed framework on two testbeds pertaining to text classification using pretrained language models. The upstream testbeds encompass over fifty thousand documents associated with twenty-eight thousand users, seven protected attributes and five different classification tasks. The downstream testbeds span three policy outcomes and over 5.41 million total observations. Results in comparison with several existing metrics show that the upstream representational harm measures produced by FAIR-Frame and other metrics are significantly different from one another, and that FAIR-Frame’s representational fairness measures have the highest percentage alignment and lowest error with allocational harm observed in downstream applications. Our findings have important implications for various ML contexts, including information retrieval, user modeling, digital platforms, and text classification, where responsible and trustworthy AI are becoming an imperative.

Putting Fairness Principles into Practice: Challenges, Metrics, and Improvements

Metrics and methods for a systematic comparison of fairness-aware machine learning algorithms

Fairness Evaluation in Text Classification: Machine Learning Practitioner Perspectives of Individual and Group Fairness

Fairness Testing: A Comprehensive Survey and Analysis of Trends

The Measure and Mismeasure of Fairness

A Review of Fairness and A Practical Guide to Selecting Context-Appropriate Fairness Metrics in Machine Learning

Fairness Through Equality of Effort

Should Fairness be a Metric or a Model? A Model-based Framework for Assessing Bias in Machine Learning Pipelines

Developing a Philosophical Framework for Fair Machine Learning: Lessons From The Case of Algorithmic Collusion

Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?

Algorithmic Fairness: A Tolerance Perspective

FairerML: an Extensible Platform for Analysing, Visualising, and Mitigating Biases in Machine Learning [application Notes]

What-is and How-to for Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey, Reflection, and Perspective

Measuring Non-Expert Comprehension of Machine Learning Fairness Metrics

The Fairness Field Guide: Perspectives from Social and Formal Sciences

Parametric Fairness with Statistical Guarantees

Providing a Philosophical Critique and Guidance of Fairness Metrics

Towards Fair Machine Learning Software: Understanding and Addressing Model Bias Through Counterfactual Thinking

Measuring, Interpreting, and Improving Fairness of Algorithms using Causal Inference and Randomized Experiments

Implementing Fairness: the view from a FairDream

A Review on Fairness in Machine Learning