Recycling privileged learning and distribution matching for fairness

Equipping machine learning models with ethical and legal constraints is a serious issue; without this, the future of machine learning is at risk. This paper takes a step forward in this direction and focuses on ensuring machine learning models deliver fair decisions. In legal scholarships, the notion of fairness itself is evolving and multi-faceted. We set an overarching goal to develop a unified machine learning framework that is able to handle any definitions of fairness, their combinations, and also new definitions that might be stipulated in the future. To achieve our goal, we recycle two well-established machine learning techniques, privileged learning and distribution matching, and harmonize them for satisfying multi-faceted fairness definitions. We consider protected characteristics such as race and gender as privileged information that is available at training but not at test time; this accelerates model training and delivers fairness through unawareness. Further, we cast demographic parity, equalized odds, and equality of opportunity as a classical two-sample problem of conditional distributions, which can be solved in a general form by using distance measures in Hilbert Space. We show several existing models are special cases of ours. Finally, we advocate returning the Pareto frontier of multi-objective minimization of error and unfairness in predictions. This will facilitate decision makers to select an operating point and to be accountable for it

Bias and unfairness in machine learning models: a systematic literature review

One of the difficulties of artificial intelligence is to ensure that model decisions are fair and free of bias. In research, datasets, metrics, techniques, and tools are applied to detect and mitigate algorithmic unfairness and bias. This study aims to examine existing knowledge on bias and unfairness in Machine Learning models, identifying mitigation methods, fairness metrics, and supporting tools. A Systematic Literature Review found 40 eligible articles published between 2017 and 2022 in the Scopus, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, and Google Scholar knowledge bases. The results show numerous bias and unfairness detection and mitigation approaches for ML technologies, with clearly defined metrics in the literature, and varied metrics can be highlighted. We recommend further research to define the techniques and metrics that should be employed in each case to standardize and ensure the impartiality of the machine learning model, thus, allowing the most appropriate metric to detect bias and unfairness in a given context

Robust Fairness under Covariate Shift

Making predictions that are fair with regard to protected group membership (race, gender, age, etc.) has become an important requirement for classification algorithms. Existing techniques derive a fair model from sampled labeled data relying on the assumption that training and testing data are identically and independently drawn (iid) from the same distribution. In practice, distribution shift can and does occur between training and testing datasets as the characteristics of individuals interacting with the machine learning system change. We investigate fairness under covariate shift, a relaxation of the iid assumption in which the inputs or covariates change while the conditional label distribution remains the same. We seek fair decisions under these assumptions on target data with unknown labels. We propose an approach that obtains the predictor that is robust to the worst-case in terms of target performance while satisfying target fairness requirements and matching statistical properties of the source data. We demonstrate the benefits of our approach on benchmark prediction tasks

Pre-existing fairness concerns restrict the cultural evolution and generalization of inequitable norms in children

Many social exchanges produce benefits that would not exist otherwise, but anticipating conflicts about how to distribute these benefits can derail exchange and destroy the gains. Coordination norms can solve this problem by providing a shared understanding of how to distribute benefits, but such norms can also perpetuate group- level inequality. To examine how inequitable norms evolve culturally and whether they generalize from one setting to another, we conducted an incentivized lab-in-the-field experiment among kindergarten (5–6) and second-grade (8–9) children living in Switzerland (4′228 decisions collected from 326 children). In Part 1, we created two arbitrarily marked groups, triangles and circles. We randomly and repeatedly formed pairs with one triangle and one circle, and players in a pair played a simple bargaining game in which failure to agree destroyed the gains from social exchange. At the beginning of Part 1 we suggested a specific way to play the game. In symmetric treatments, this suggestion did not imply inequality between the groups, while in asymmetric treatments it did. Part 2 of the experiment addressed the generalization of norms. Retaining their group affili- ations from Part 1, each child had to distribute resources between an in-group member and an out-group member. Children of both age groups in symmetric treatments used our suggestions about how to play the game to coordinate in Part 1. In asymmetric treatments, children followed our suggestions less consistently, which reduced coordination but moderated inequality. In Part 2, older children did not generalize privilege from Part 1. Rather, they compensated the underprivileged. Younger children neither generalized privilege nor compensated the underprivileged

A review of domain adaptation without target labels

Domain adaptation has become a prominent problem setting in machine learning and related fields. This review asks the question: how can a classifier learn from a source domain and generalize to a target domain? We present a categorization of approaches, divided into, what we refer to as, sample-based, feature-based and inference-based methods. Sample-based methods focus on weighting individual observations during training based on their importance to the target domain. Feature-based methods revolve around on mapping, projecting and representing features such that a source classifier performs well on the target domain and inference-based methods incorporate adaptation into the parameter estimation procedure, for instance through constraints on the optimization procedure. Additionally, we review a number of conditions that allow for formulating bounds on the cross-domain generalization error. Our categorization highlights recurring ideas and raises questions important to further research.Comment: 20 pages, 5 figure

Contrastive examples for addressing the tyranny of the majority

Computer vision algorithms, e.g. for face recognition, favour groups of individuals that are better represented in the training data. This happens because of the generalization that classifiers have to make. It is simpler to fit the majority groups as this fit is more important to overall error. We propose to create a balanced training dataset, consisting of the original dataset plus new data points in which the group memberships are intervened, minorities become majorities and vice versa. We show that current generative adversarial networks are a powerful tool for learning these data points, called contrastive examples. We experiment with the equalized odds bias measure on tabular data as well as image data (CelebA and Diversity in Faces datasets). Contrastive examples allow us to expose correlations between group membership and other seemingly neutral features. Whenever a causal graph is available, we can put those contrastive examples in the perspective of counterfactuals