Abstract:Motivated by a plethora of practical examples where bias is induced by automated-decision making algorithms, there has been strong recent interest in the design of fair algorithms. However, there is often a dichotomy between fairness and efficacy: fair algorithms may proffer low social welfare solutions whereas welfare optimizing algorithms may be very unfair. This issue is exemplified in the machine scheduling problem where, for $n$ jobs, the social welfare of any fair solution may be a factor $\Omega(n)$ worse than the optimal welfare. In this paper, we prove that this dichotomy between fairness and efficacy can be overcome if we allow for a negligible amount of bias: there exist algorithms that are both "almost perfectly fair" and have a constant factor efficacy ratio, that is, are guaranteed to output solutions that have social welfare within a constant factor of optimal welfare. Specifically, for any $\epsilon>0$, there exist mechanisms with efficacy ratio $\Theta(\frac{1}{\epsilon})$ and where no agent is more than an $\epsilon$ fraction worse off than they are in the fairest possible solution (given by an algorithm that does not use personal or type data). Moreover, these bicriteria guarantees are tight and apply to both the single machine case and the multiple machine case. The key to our results are the use of Pareto scheduling mechanisms. These mechanisms, by the judicious use of personal or type data, are able to exploit Pareto improvements that benefit every individual; such Pareto improvements would typically be forbidden by fair scheduling algorithms designed to satisfy standard statistical measures of group fairness. We anticipate this paradigm, the judicious use of personal data by a fair algorithm to greatly improve performance at the cost of negligible bias, has wider application.

Job fairness in non-preemptive job scheduling

Optimal Online Algorithms for Scheduling on Two Identical Machines under a Grade of Service

A Novel Job Scheduling Model to Enhance Efficiency and Overall User Fairness of Cloud Computing Environment.

Fairness in Repetitive Scheduling

Fair Algorithm Design: Fair and Efficacious Machine Scheduling

Fairness-utility Trade-off in Multi-Agent Scheduling

Guarantee Strict Fairness and UtilizePrediction Better in Parallel Job Scheduling

Priority-based Fair Scheduling in Edge Computing

Fair scheduling on parallel batch machines with non-identical capacities

Fair Scheduling in Networks Through Packet Election

Equitable Scheduling on a Single Machine

Fairness-considered Shortest Job First Strategy for Memory Scheduling

On Fair Size-Based Scheduling

Fair opportunistic schedulers for Lossy Polling systems

Fair Repetitive Interval Scheduling

Fairness and Decision-making in Collaborative Shift Scheduling Systems

Comparison of Loss ratios of different scheduling algorithms

K%-Fair Scheduling: A Flexible Task Scheduling Strategy for Balancing Fairness and Efficiency in MapReduce Systems

Feasibility Analysis under Fixed Priority Scheduling with Limited Preemptions

On Job Scheduling with Preemption Penalties

A New Fairness Model based on User's Objective for Multi-user Multi-processor Online Scheduling