Problem Formulation and Fairness

Formulating data science problems is an uncertain and difficult process. It requires various forms of discretionary work to translate high-level objectives or strategic goals into tractable problems, necessitating, among other things, the identification of appropriate target variables and proxies. While these choices are rarely self-evident, normative assessments of data science projects often take them for granted, even though different translations can raise profoundly different ethical concerns. Whether we consider a data science project fair often has as much to do with the formulation of the problem as any property of the resulting model. Building on six months of ethnographic fieldwork with a corporate data science team---and channeling ideas from sociology and history of science, critical data studies, and early writing on knowledge discovery in databases---we describe the complex set of actors and activities involved in problem formulation. Our research demonstrates that the specification and operationalization of the problem are always negotiated and elastic, and rarely worked out with explicit normative considerations in mind. In so doing, we show that careful accounts of everyday data science work can help us better understand how and why data science problems are posed in certain ways---and why specific formulations prevail in practice, even in the face of what might seem like normatively preferable alternatives. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings, arguing that effective normative interventions will require attending to the practical work of problem formulation.Comment: Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '19), January 29-31, 2019, Atlanta, GA, US

Is Equality always desirable?

In this paper, we analyze the trade-off between perceived fairness and perceived attractiveness in crew rostering. First, we introduce the Fairness-oriented Crew Rostering Problem. In this problem, attractive cyclic rosters have to be constructed, while respecting a pre-specified fairness level. Then, we propose a flexible mathematical formulation, able to exploit problem specific knowledge, and develop an exact Branch-Price-and-Cut solution method. The solution method combines Branch-and-Bound with column generation, where profitable columns are separated by solving resource constrained shortest path problems with surplus variables. We also derive a set of valid inequalities to tighten the formulation. Finally, we demonstrate the benefit of our approach on practical instances from Netherlands Railways, the largest passenger railway operator in the Netherlands. We are able to construct the explicit trade-off curve between fairness and attractiveness and show that a sequential approach can lead to suboptimal results. In particular, we show that focusing solely on fairness leads to rosters that are disproportionally less attractive. Furthermore, this decrease in attractiveness is heavily skewed towards the most exible employees. Thus, in order to generate truly fair rosters, the explicit trade-off between fairness and attractiveness should be considered

Max-min Fair Beamforming for SWIPT Systems with Non-linear EH Model

We study the beamforming design for multiuser systems with simultaneous wireless information and power transfer (SWIPT). Employing a practical non-linear energy harvesting (EH) model, the design is formulated as a non-convex optimization problem for the maximization of the minimum harvested power across several energy harvesting receivers. The proposed problem formulation takes into account imperfect channel state information (CSI) and a minimum required signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR). The globally optimal solution of the design problem is obtained via the semidefinite programming (SDP) relaxation approach. Interestingly, we can show that at most one dedicated energy beam is needed to achieve optimality. Numerical results demonstrate that with the proposed design a significant performance gain and improved fairness can be provided to the users compared to two baseline schemes.Comment: Invited paper, IEEE VTC 2017, Fall, Toronto, Canad