Human Perceptions of Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: A Case Study of Criminal Risk Prediction

As algorithms are increasingly used to make important decisions that affect human lives, ranging from social benefit assignment to predicting risk of criminal recidivism, concerns have been raised about the fairness of algorithmic decision making. Most prior works on algorithmic fairness normatively prescribe how fair decisions ought to be made. In contrast, here, we descriptively survey users for how they perceive and reason about fairness in algorithmic decision making. A key contribution of this work is the framework we propose to understand why people perceive certain features as fair or unfair to be used in algorithms. Our framework identifies eight properties of features, such as relevance, volitionality and reliability, as latent considerations that inform people's moral judgments about the fairness of feature use in decision-making algorithms. We validate our framework through a series of scenario-based surveys with 576 people. We find that, based on a person's assessment of the eight latent properties of a feature in our exemplar scenario, we can accurately (> 85%) predict if the person will judge the use of the feature as fair. Our findings have important implications. At a high-level, we show that people's unfairness concerns are multi-dimensional and argue that future studies need to address unfairness concerns beyond discrimination. At a low-level, we find considerable disagreements in people's fairness judgments. We identify root causes of the disagreements, and note possible pathways to resolve them.Comment: To appear in the Proceedings of the Web Conference (WWW 2018). Code available at https://fate-computing.mpi-sws.org/procedural_fairness

Exploring Graph Neural Networks for Indian Legal Judgment Prediction

The burdensome impact of a skewed judges-to-cases ratio on the judicial system manifests in an overwhelming backlog of pending cases alongside an ongoing influx of new ones. To tackle this issue and expedite the judicial process, the proposition of an automated system capable of suggesting case outcomes based on factual evidence and precedent from past cases gains significance. This research paper centres on developing a graph neural network-based model to address the Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) problem, recognizing the intrinsic graph structure of judicial cases and making it a binary node classification problem. We explored various embeddings as model features, while nodes such as time nodes and judicial acts were added and pruned to evaluate the model's performance. The study is done while considering the ethical dimension of fairness in these predictions, considering gender and name biases. A link prediction task is also conducted to assess the model's proficiency in anticipating connections between two specified nodes. By harnessing the capabilities of graph neural networks and incorporating fairness analyses, this research aims to contribute insights towards streamlining the adjudication process, enhancing judicial efficiency, and fostering a more equitable legal landscape, ultimately alleviating the strain imposed by mounting case backlogs. Our best-performing model with XLNet pre-trained embeddings as its features gives the macro F1 score of 75% for the LJP task. For link prediction, the same set of features is the best performing giving ROC of more than 80

ALJP: An Arabic Legal Judgment Prediction in Personal Status Cases Using Machine Learning Models

Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) aims to predict judgment outcomes based on case description. Several researchers have developed techniques to assist potential clients by predicting the outcome in the legal profession. However, none of the proposed techniques were implemented in Arabic, and only a few attempts were implemented in English, Chinese, and Hindi. In this paper, we develop a system that utilizes deep learning (DL) and natural language processing (NLP) techniques to predict the judgment outcome from Arabic case scripts, especially in cases of custody and annulment of marriage. This system will assist judges and attorneys in improving their work and time efficiency while reducing sentencing disparity. In addition, it will help litigants, lawyers, and law students analyze the probable outcomes of any given case before trial. We use a different machine and deep learning models such as Support Vector Machine (SVM), Logistic regression (LR), Long Short Term Memory (LSTM), and Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (BiLSTM) using representation techniques such as TF-IDF and word2vec on the developed dataset. Experimental results demonstrate that compared with the five baseline methods, the SVM model with word2vec and LR with TF-IDF achieve the highest accuracy of 88% and 78% in predicting the judgment on custody cases and annulment of marriage, respectively. Furthermore, the LR and SVM with word2vec and BiLSTM model with TF-IDF achieved the highest accuracy of 88% and 69% in predicting the probability of outcomes on custody cases and annulment of marriage, respectively

Hybrid model using logit and nonparametric methods for predicting micro-entity failure

Following the calls from literature on bankruptcy, a parsimonious hybrid bankruptcy model is developed in this paper by combining parametric and non-parametric approaches.To this end, the variables with the highest predictive power to detect bankruptcy are selected using logistic regression (LR). Subsequently, alternative non-parametric methods (Multilayer Perceptron, Rough Set, and Classification-Regression Trees) are applied, in turn, to firms classified as either “bankrupt” or “not bankrupt”. Our findings show that hybrid models, particularly those combining LR and Multilayer Perceptron, offer better accuracy performance and interpretability and converge faster than each method implemented in isolation. Moreover, the authors demonstrate that the introduction of non-financial and macroeconomic variables complement financial ratios for bankruptcy prediction

Exploiting Contrastive Learning and Numerical Evidence for Confusing Legal Judgment Prediction

Given the fact description text of a legal case, legal judgment prediction (LJP) aims to predict the case's charge, law article and penalty term. A core problem of LJP is how to distinguish confusing legal cases, where only subtle text differences exist. Previous studies fail to distinguish different classification errors with a standard cross-entropy classification loss, and ignore the numbers in the fact description for predicting the term of penalty. To tackle these issues, in this work, first, we propose a moco-based supervised contrastive learning to learn distinguishable representations, and explore the best strategy to construct positive example pairs to benefit all three subtasks of LJP simultaneously. Second, in order to exploit the numbers in legal cases for predicting the penalty terms of certain cases, we further enhance the representation of the fact description with extracted crime amounts which are encoded by a pre-trained numeracy model. Extensive experiments on public benchmarks show that the proposed method achieves new state-of-the-art results, especially on confusing legal cases. Ablation studies also demonstrate the effectiveness of each component.Comment: Accepted to Findings of EMNLP 202