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.

Normalise for Fairness: A Simple Normalisation Technique for Fairness in Regression Machine Learning Problems

Standardizing fairness-evaluation procedures: interdisciplinary insights on machine learning algorithms in creditworthiness assessments for small personal loans

Learning Fair Classifiers via Min-Max F-divergence Regularization

Fairness And Performance In Harmony: Data Debiasing Is All You Need

Fairness for Deep Learning Predictions Using Bias Parity Score Based Loss Function Regularization

FaiR-N: Fair and Robust Neural Networks for Structured Data

Towards A Holistic View of Bias in Machine Learning: Bridging Algorithmic Fairness and Imbalanced Learning

A Novel Approach to Fairness in Automated Decision-Making using Affective Normalization

Recovering from Biased Data: Can Fairness Constraints Improve Accuracy?

AdapFair: Ensuring Continuous Fairness for Machine Learning Operations

AIM: Attributing, Interpreting, Mitigating Data Unfairness

Individual Fairness Through Reweighting and Tuning

Fairness with Adaptive Weights.

Increasing Fairness in Predictions Using Bias Parity Score Based Loss Function Regularization

Fairness in Machine Learning with Tractable Models

A novel approach for assessing fairness in deployed machine learning algorithms

Error Parity Fairness: Testing for Group Fairness in Regression Tasks

fairml: A Statistician's Take on Fair Machine Learning Modelling

FairIF: Boosting Fairness in Deep Learning via Influence Functions with Validation Set Sensitive Attributes

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

Score Normalization for Demographic Fairness in Face Recognition