Abstract:The widespread use of machine learning and data-driven algorithms for decision making has been steadily increasing over many years. The areas in which this is happening are diverse: healthcare, employment, finance, education, the legal system to name a few; and the associated negative side effects are being increasingly harmful for society. Negative data \emph{bias} is one of those, which tends to result in harmful consequences for specific groups of people. Any mitigation strategy or effective policy that addresses the negative consequences of bias must start with awareness that bias exists, together with a way to understand and quantify it. However, there is a lack of consensus on how to measure data bias and oftentimes the intended meaning is context dependent and not uniform within the research community. The main contributions of our work are: (1) The definition of Uniform Bias (UB), the first bias measure with a clear and simple interpretation in the full range of bias values. (2) A systematic study to characterize the flaws of existing measures in the context of anti employment discrimination rules used by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, additionally showing how UB solves open problems in this domain. (3) A framework that provides an efficient way to derive a mathematical formula for a bias measure based on an algorithmic specification of bias addition. Our results are experimentally validated using nine publicly available datasets and theoretically analyzed, which provide novel insights about the problem. Based on our approach, we also design a bias mitigation model that might be useful to policymakers.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

### Problems the Paper Aims to Solve This paper aims to address the issue of data bias in decision-making processes involving machine learning and data-driven algorithms. Specifically, the authors focus on how to effectively measure and understand data bias in order to take appropriate mitigation measures. Currently, although various methods for measuring bias have been proposed, these methods have many shortcomings in practical applications, lacking unified standards and interpretability. ### Main Contributions 1. **Defined a new bias metric—Uniform Bias (UB)**: - UB is a bias measurement method with a clear and simple explanation, applicable to the entire range of bias values. - Compared to existing bias measurement methods, UB has better interpretability and consistency. 2. **Systematically studied the shortcomings of existing bias measurement methods**: - By analyzing the anti-employment discrimination rules used by the U.S. Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), the paper demonstrates the inadequacies of existing bias measurement methods in specific contexts. - Proposed specific methods for using UB to address these issues. 3. **Introduced a new framework**: - This framework provides a mathematical method for efficiently calculating bias metrics based on algorithm specifications. - This framework can not only be used to calculate bias but also guide data scientists in bias mitigation. ### Background and Motivation - **Pervasiveness of data bias**: With the widespread application of machine learning and data-driven algorithms in fields such as healthcare, employment, finance, education, and law, the negative impact of data bias is becoming increasingly severe, causing harmful consequences to society. - **Challenges in bias measurement**: Currently, there is a lack of consensus on how to measure data bias, and different research communities have inconsistent definitions and measurement methods for bias. - **Legal and policy needs**: In the legal field, such as in employment discrimination cases, correctly measuring data bias is crucial for identifying and addressing inequalities. However, existing bias measurement methods are not applicable in some cases, making it difficult to make accurate judgments. ### Methods and Results - **Definition of bias metric**: The authors defined Uniform Bias (UB) and provided its mathematical expression. UB can be directly calculated from a given dataset and has clear interpretability. - **Experimental validation**: UB was experimentally validated using 9 public datasets and theoretically analyzed, providing new insights into the bias problem. - **Bias mitigation model**: Based on the proposed UB metric, a bias mitigation model was designed, which may be helpful for policymakers. ### Conclusion This paper fills the gaps in existing bias measurement methods by proposing a new bias metric—Uniform Bias (UB), providing data scientists and policymakers with an effective and interpretable tool to better understand and mitigate data bias issues.

A Principled Approach for a New Bias Measure

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

De-biasing "bias" measurement

Using Machine Bias To Measure Human Bias

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

Bias Neutralization Framework: Measuring Fairness in Large Language Models with Bias Intelligence Quotient (BiQ)

Measuring Implicit Bias in Explicitly Unbiased Large Language Models

Detecting Risk of Biased Output with Balance Measures

Whither Bias Goes, I Will Go: An Integrative, Systematic Review of Algorithmic Bias Mitigation

An Actionable Framework for Assessing Bias and Fairness in Large Language Model Use Cases

Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Survey

Bias in Bios: A Case Study of Semantic Representation Bias in a High-Stakes Setting

Towards Standardizing AI Bias Exploration

Measuring and Mitigating Bias for Tabular Datasets with Multiple Protected Attributes

Undesirable Biases in NLP: Addressing Challenges of Measurement

Uncovering Latent Biases in Text: Method and Application to Peer Review

D-BIAS: A Causality-Based Human-in-the-Loop System for Tackling Algorithmic Bias

Bias in Machine Learning Software: Why? How? What to do?

Understanding Bias in Machine Learning

Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: Evaluating Claims and Practices

Local Law 144: A Critical Analysis of Regression Metrics