5,796 research outputs found
Towards a Critical Race Methodology in Algorithmic Fairness
We examine the way race and racial categories are adopted in algorithmic
fairness frameworks. Current methodologies fail to adequately account for the
socially constructed nature of race, instead adopting a conceptualization of
race as a fixed attribute. Treating race as an attribute, rather than a
structural, institutional, and relational phenomenon, can serve to minimize the
structural aspects of algorithmic unfairness. In this work, we focus on the
history of racial categories and turn to critical race theory and sociological
work on race and ethnicity to ground conceptualizations of race for fairness
research, drawing on lessons from public health, biomedical research, and
social survey research. We argue that algorithmic fairness researchers need to
take into account the multidimensionality of race, take seriously the processes
of conceptualizing and operationalizing race, focus on social processes which
produce racial inequality, and consider perspectives of those most affected by
sociotechnical systems.Comment: Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '20),
January 27-30, 2020, Barcelona, Spai
Algorithmic Fairness from a Non-ideal Perspective
Inspired by recent breakthroughs in predictive modeling, practitioners in both industry and government have turned to machine learning with hopes of operationalizing predictions to drive automated decisions. Unfortunately, many social desiderata concerning consequential decisions, such as justice or fairness, have no natural formulation within a purely predictive framework. In efforts to mitigate these problems, researchers have proposed a variety of metrics for quantifying deviations from various statistical parities that we might expect to observe in a fair world and offered a variety of algorithms in attempts to satisfy subsets of these parities or to trade o the degree to which they are satised against utility. In this paper, we connect this approach to fair machine learning to the literature on ideal and non-ideal methodological approaches in political philosophy. The ideal approach requires positing the principles according to which a just world would operate. In the most straightforward application of ideal theory, one supports a proposed policy by arguing that it closes a discrepancy between the real and the perfectly just world. However, by failing to account for the mechanisms by which our non-ideal world arose, the responsibilities of various decision-makers, and the impacts of proposed policies, naive applications of ideal thinking can lead to misguided interventions. In this paper, we demonstrate a connection between the fair machine learning literature and the ideal approach in political philosophy, and argue that the increasingly apparent shortcomings of proposed fair machine learning algorithms reflect broader troubles
faced by the ideal approach. We conclude with a critical discussion of the harms of misguided solutions, a
reinterpretation of impossibility results, and directions for future researc
iFair: Learning Individually Fair Data Representations for Algorithmic Decision Making
People are rated and ranked, towards algorithmic decision making in an
increasing number of applications, typically based on machine learning.
Research on how to incorporate fairness into such tasks has prevalently pursued
the paradigm of group fairness: giving adequate success rates to specifically
protected groups. In contrast, the alternative paradigm of individual fairness
has received relatively little attention, and this paper advances this less
explored direction. The paper introduces a method for probabilistically mapping
user records into a low-rank representation that reconciles individual fairness
and the utility of classifiers and rankings in downstream applications. Our
notion of individual fairness requires that users who are similar in all
task-relevant attributes such as job qualification, and disregarding all
potentially discriminating attributes such as gender, should have similar
outcomes. We demonstrate the versatility of our method by applying it to
classification and learning-to-rank tasks on a variety of real-world datasets.
Our experiments show substantial improvements over the best prior work for this
setting.Comment: Accepted at ICDE 2019. Please cite the ICDE 2019 proceedings versio
Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
The potential for machine learning (ML) systems to amplify social inequities
and unfairness is receiving increasing popular and academic attention. A surge
of recent work has focused on the development of algorithmic tools to assess
and mitigate such unfairness. If these tools are to have a positive impact on
industry practice, however, it is crucial that their design be informed by an
understanding of real-world needs. Through 35 semi-structured interviews and an
anonymous survey of 267 ML practitioners, we conduct the first systematic
investigation of commercial product teams' challenges and needs for support in
developing fairer ML systems. We identify areas of alignment and disconnect
between the challenges faced by industry practitioners and solutions proposed
in the fair ML research literature. Based on these findings, we highlight
directions for future ML and HCI research that will better address industry
practitioners' needs.Comment: To appear in the 2019 ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems (CHI 2019
{iFair}: {L}earning Individually Fair Data Representations for Algorithmic Decision Making
People are rated and ranked, towards algorithmic decision making in an increasing number of applications, typically based on machine learning. Research on how to incorporate fairness into such tasks has prevalently pursued the paradigm of group fairness: ensuring that each ethnic or social group receives its fair share in the outcome of classifiers and rankings. In contrast, the alternative paradigm of individual fairness has received relatively little attention. This paper introduces a method for probabilistically clustering user records into a low-rank representation that captures individual fairness yet also achieves high accuracy in classification and regression models. Our notion of individual fairness requires that users who are similar in all task-relevant attributes such as job qualification, and disregarding all potentially discriminating attributes such as gender, should have similar outcomes. Since the case for fairness is ubiquitous across many tasks, we aim to learn general representations that can be applied to arbitrary downstream use-cases. We demonstrate the versatility of our method by applying it to classification and learning-to-rank tasks on two real-world datasets. Our experiments show substantial improvements over the best prior work for this setting
Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLP
We survey 146 papers analyzing "bias" in NLP systems, finding that their
motivations are often vague, inconsistent, and lacking in normative reasoning,
despite the fact that analyzing "bias" is an inherently normative process. We
further find that these papers' proposed quantitative techniques for measuring
or mitigating "bias" are poorly matched to their motivations and do not engage
with the relevant literature outside of NLP. Based on these findings, we
describe the beginnings of a path forward by proposing three recommendations
that should guide work analyzing "bias" in NLP systems. These recommendations
rest on a greater recognition of the relationships between language and social
hierarchies, encouraging researchers and practitioners to articulate their
conceptualizations of "bias"---i.e., what kinds of system behaviors are
harmful, in what ways, to whom, and why, as well as the normative reasoning
underlying these statements---and to center work around the lived experiences
of members of communities affected by NLP systems, while interrogating and
reimagining the power relations between technologists and such communities
- …