Certifying and Removing Disparate Impact

@article{Feldman2015CertifyingAR,
  title={Certifying and Removing Disparate Impact},
  author={Michael Feldman and Sorelle A. Friedler and John Moeller and C. Scheidegger and S. Venkatasubramanian},
  journal={Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining},
  year={2015}
}
What does it mean for an algorithm to be biased? In U.S. law, unintentional bias is encoded via disparate impact, which occurs when a selection process has widely different outcomes for different groups, even as it appears to be neutral. This legal determination hinges on a definition of a protected class (ethnicity, gender) and an explicit description of the process. When computers are involved, determining disparate impact (and hence bias) is harder. It might not be possible to disclose the… Expand
View on ACM
arxiv.org
903 Citations
Highly Influential Citations
100
Background Citations
532
Methods Citations
219
Results Citations
25

Figures and Topics from this paper

903 Citations

Citation Type

Citation Type

Encoding Fair Representations
Fair decision making is a difficult problem. Making decision based on certain characteristics about people could be considered unfair, for example, having an individual’s race be a factor in the… Expand
An algorithm for removing sensitive information: application to race-independent recidivism prediction
TLDR
This paper proposes a method to eliminate bias from predictive models by removing all information regarding protected variables from the data to which the models will ultimately be trained, and provides a probabilistic notion of algorithmic bias. Expand
Avoiding Disparate Impact with Counterfactual Distributions
When a classification model is used to make predictions on individuals, it may be undesirable or illegal for the performance of the model to change with respect to a sensitive attribute such as race… Expand
Assessing algorithmic fairness with unobserved protected class using data combination
TLDR
This paper studies a fundamental challenge to assessing disparate impacts, or performance disparities in general, in practice: protected class membership is often not observed in the data, particularly in lending and healthcare, and provides optimization-based algorithms for computing and visualizing sets of simultaneously achievable pairwise disparties for assessing disparities. Expand
Evaluating Fairness Metrics in the Presence of Dataset Bias
TLDR
A case study in which the issue of bias detection is framed as a causal inference problem with observational data, and a set of best practice guidelines to select the fairness metric that is most likely to detect bias if it is present is proposed. Expand
Repairing without Retraining: Avoiding Disparate Impact with Counterfactual Distributions
TLDR
This paper describes the perturbed distribution as a counterfactual distribution, and describes its properties for common fairness criteria, and discusses how the estimated distribution can be used to build a data preprocessor that can reduce disparate impact without training a new model. Expand
FlipTest: fairness testing via optimal transport
TLDR
Evaluating the approach on three case studies, it is shown that this provides a computationally inexpensive way to identify subgroups that may be harmed by model discrimination, including in cases where the model satisfies group fairness criteria. Expand
Avoiding Discrimination with Counterfactual Distributions
When a classification model is used to make predictions on individuals, it may be undesirable or illegal for the performance of the model to change with respect to a sensitive attribute (e.g., race… Expand
A statistical framework for fair predictive algorithms
TLDR
A method to remove bias from predictive models by removing all information regarding protected variables from the permitted training data is proposed and is general enough to accommodate arbitrary data types, e.g. binary, continuous, etc. Expand
Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: An Excursion Through the Lens of Causality
TLDR
This work uses the Rubin-Neyman potential outcomes framework for the analysis of cause-effect relationships to robustly estimate FACE and FACT and shows that FACT, being somewhat more nuanced compared to FACE, can yield findings of discrimination that differ from those obtained using FACE. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 36 REFERENCES
Toward a Coherent Test for Disparate Impact Discrimination
Statistics are generally plaintiffs’ primary evidence in establishing a prima facie case of disparate impact discrimination. Thus, the use, or misuse, of statistics dictates case outcomes. Lacking a… Expand
Integrating induction and deduction for finding evidence of discrimination
TLDR
An implementation, called LP2DD, of the overall reference model that integrates induction, through data mining classification rule extraction, and deduction, through a computational logic implementation of the analytical tools is presented. Expand
Big Data's Disparate Impact
Advocates of algorithmic techniques like data mining argue that these techniques eliminate human biases from the decision-making process. But an algorithm is only as good as the data it works with.… Expand
Fairness-Aware Classifier with Prejudice Remover Regularizer
TLDR
A regularization approach is proposed that is applicable to any prediction algorithm with probabilistic discriminative models and applied to logistic regression and empirically show its effectiveness and efficiency. Expand
Fairness-aware Learning through Regularization Approach
TLDR
This paper discusses three causes of unfairness in machine learning and proposes a regularization approach that is applicable to any prediction algorithm with probabilistic discriminative models and applies it to logistic regression to empirically show its effectiveness and efficiency. Expand
Three naive Bayes approaches for discrimination-free classification
TLDR
Three approaches for making the naive Bayes classifier discrimination-free are presented: modifying the probability of the decision being positive, training one model for every sensitive attribute value and balancing them, and adding a latent variable to the Bayesian model that represents the unbiased label and optimizing the model parameters for likelihood using expectation maximization. Expand
Fairness through awareness
TLDR
A framework for fair classification comprising a (hypothetical) task-specific metric for determining the degree to which individuals are similar with respect to the classification task at hand and an algorithm for maximizing utility subject to the fairness constraint, that similar individuals are treated similarly is presented. Expand
Classifying without discriminating
  • F. Kamiran, T. Calders
  • Computer Science
  • 2009 2nd International Conference on Computer, Control and Communication
  • 2009
TLDR
This paper proposes a new classification scheme for learning unbiased models on biased training data based on massaging the dataset by making the least intrusive modifications which lead to an unbiased dataset and learns a non-discriminating classifier. Expand
A study of top-k measures for discrimination discovery
TLDR
To what extent the sets of top-k ranked rules with respect to any two pairs of measures agree is studied, including risk difference, risk ratio, odds ratio, and few others. Expand
On the Statistical Consistency of Algorithms for Binary Classification under Class Imbalance
TLDR
This paper studies consistency with respect to one performance measure, namely the arithmetic mean of the true positive and true negative rates (AM), and establishes that some practically popular approaches, such as applying an empirically determined threshold to a suitable class probability estimate or performing an empirical balanced form of risk minimization, are in fact consistent withrespect to the AM. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
...