Abstract:We develop a solution framework for mitigating algorithmic bias in machine-learning classifiers. We consider an interactive problem setting where Alice (e.g., the firm) proposes to use data records to build a target classifier, while Bob (e.g., the regulator) builds a bias-proof classifier to protect sensitive dimensions from being discriminated on. Specific measures of algorithm fairness and a priori definition of bias terms are exempted in this propose and review scenario. Our solution relies on the idea that the discriminating strength (i.e., the bias) in Alice's target classifier corresponds to the separating capability (i.e., the signal) of Bob's discrimination-proof classifier, thus the goal is to reduce the separability of Bob's classifier while preserving the separability of Alice's classifier, obviating the fairness-utility tradeoff by separating two classifications. We measure the pairwise distance between data attributes from indicating their differences in contributing to classifier's separability. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) on the distance matrix helps establish the mapping between attributes and inferred bias sources. This bias-concentration information helps establish a ranking on attributes that suggests their bias-proneness. We mitigate bias at Bob's classifier (i.e., limit the classifier's separability) by searching for appropriate transformation of data records at bias-prone attributes. We consider polynomial/re-binning transformation at numerical/categorical data attributes, greedily suppressing attributes' maximum bias concentration below a threshold. The framework is demonstrated with a detailed case study at a well-known classification dataset. We achieve good bias-mitigation performance at 10/12 machine classifiers; results are robust across multiple design choices and engineering options. We further showcase the framework's performance at a larger dataset having >100 attributes. Results document a clear example where classification's fairness and classifier's utility under certain definitions are both enhanced.

Adapting Static Fairness to Sequential Decision-Making: Bias Mitigation Strategies towards Equal Long-term Benefit Rate

Policy Optimization with Advantage Regularization for Long-Term Fairness in Decision Systems

Long-term Fairness For Real-time Decision Making: A Constrained Online Optimization Approach

Long-Term Fairness in Sequential Multi-Agent Selection with Positive Reinforcement

Striking a Balance in Fairness for Dynamic Systems Through Reinforcement Learning

FairSense: Long-Term Fairness Analysis of ML-Enabled Systems

AdapFair: Ensuring Continuous Fairness for Machine Learning Operations

'Propose and Review': Interactive Bias Mitigation for Machine Classifiers

Towards Return Parity in Markov Decision Processes

Integrating Behavioral, Economic, and Technical Insights to Understand and Address Algorithmic Bias: A Human-Centric Perspective

Dynamic Modeling and Equilibria in Fair Decision Making

Learning to be Fair: A Consequentialist Approach to Equitable Decision-Making

Preventing Discriminatory Decision-making in Evolving Data Streams

FairMask: Better Fairness via Model-based Rebalancing of Protected Attributes

Active Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making

Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action via Counterfactual Predictions

A Comprehensive Empirical Study of Bias Mitigation Methods for Machine Learning Classifiers

Fairness Through Equality of Effort

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

Long-Term Fair Decision Making through Deep Generative Models

Fairness Shields: Safeguarding against Biased Decision Makers