Abstract:Predictive modeling is increasingly being employed to assist human decision-makers. One purported advantage of replacing human judgment with computer models in high stakes settings-- such as sentencing, hiring, policing, college admissions, and parole decisions-- is the perceived "neutrality" of computers. It is argued that because computer models do not hold personal prejudice, the predictions they produce will be equally free from prejudice. There is growing recognition that employing algorithms does not remove the potential for bias, and can even amplify it, since training data were inevitably generated by a process that is itself biased. In this paper, we provide a probabilistic definition of algorithmic bias. We propose a method to remove bias from predictive models by removing all information regarding protected variables from the permitted training data. Unlike previous work in this area, our framework is general enough to accommodate arbitrary data types, e.g. binary, continuous, etc. Motivated by models currently in use in the criminal justice system that inform decisions on pre-trial release and paroling, we apply our proposed method to a dataset on the criminal histories of individuals at the time of sentencing to produce "race-neutral" predictions of re-arrest. In the process, we demonstrate that the most common approach to creating "race-neutral" models-- omitting race as a covariate-- still results in racially disparate predictions. We then demonstrate that the application of our proposed method to these data removes racial disparities from predictions with minimal impact on predictive accuracy.

Causal Equal Protection as Algorithmic Fairness

Designing Equitable Algorithms

Fairness Deconstructed: A Sociotechnical View of 'Fair' Algorithms in Criminal Justice

Affirmative Algorithms: The Legal Grounds for Fairness as Awareness

Beyond Demographic Parity: Redefining Equal Treatment

Group Fairness Is Not Derivable From Justice: a Mathematical Proof

Fair Bayes-Optimal Classifiers Under Predictive Parity

Parametric Fairness with Statistical Guarantees

Causal Interventions for Fairness

Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairness

Causal Context Connects Counterfactual Fairness to Robust Prediction and Group Fairness

Assessing Algorithmic Fairness with Unobserved Protected Class Using Data Combination

Counterfactual Fairness Is Basically Demographic Parity

When Fair Classification Meets Noisy Protected Attributes

Improving Fairness in Criminal Justice Algorithmic Risk Assessments Using Optimal Transport and Conformal Prediction Sets

Fairness through awareness

A Burden Shared is a Burden Halved: A Fairness-Adjusted Approach to Classification

Compatibility of Fairness Metrics with EU Non-Discrimination Laws: Demographic Parity & Conditional Demographic Disparity

A statistical framework for fair predictive algorithms

Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action via Counterfactual Predictions

Principal Fairness for Human and Algorithmic Decision-Making