48 research outputs found

    Racial categories in machine learning

    Full text link
    Controversies around race and machine learning have sparked debate among computer scientists over how to design machine learning systems that guarantee fairness. These debates rarely engage with how racial identity is embedded in our social experience, making for sociological and psychological complexity. This complexity challenges the paradigm of considering fairness to be a formal property of supervised learning with respect to protected personal attributes. Racial identity is not simply a personal subjective quality. For people labeled "Black" it is an ascribed political category that has consequences for social differentiation embedded in systemic patterns of social inequality achieved through both social and spatial segregation. In the United States, racial classification can best be understood as a system of inherently unequal status categories that places whites as the most privileged category while signifying the Negro/black category as stigmatized. Social stigma is reinforced through the unequal distribution of societal rewards and goods along racial lines that is reinforced by state, corporate, and civic institutions and practices. This creates a dilemma for society and designers: be blind to racial group disparities and thereby reify racialized social inequality by no longer measuring systemic inequality, or be conscious of racial categories in a way that itself reifies race. We propose a third option. By preceding group fairness interventions with unsupervised learning to dynamically detect patterns of segregation, machine learning systems can mitigate the root cause of social disparities, social segregation and stratification, without further anchoring status categories of disadvantage

    Learning Tasks for Multitask Learning: Heterogenous Patient Populations in the ICU

    Full text link
    Machine learning approaches have been effective in predicting adverse outcomes in different clinical settings. These models are often developed and evaluated on datasets with heterogeneous patient populations. However, good predictive performance on the aggregate population does not imply good performance for specific groups. In this work, we present a two-step framework to 1) learn relevant patient subgroups, and 2) predict an outcome for separate patient populations in a multi-task framework, where each population is a separate task. We demonstrate how to discover relevant groups in an unsupervised way with a sequence-to-sequence autoencoder. We show that using these groups in a multi-task framework leads to better predictive performance of in-hospital mortality both across groups and overall. We also highlight the need for more granular evaluation of performance when dealing with heterogeneous populations.Comment: KDD 201

    Uncovering and Mitigating Algorithmic Bias through Learned Latent Structure

    Get PDF
    Recent research has highlighted the vulnerabilities of modern machine learning based systems to bias, especially for segments of society that are under-represented in training data. In this work, we develop a novel, tunable algorithm for mitigating the hidden, and potentially unknown, biases within training data. Our algorithm fuses the original learning task with a variational autoencoder to learn the latent structure within the dataset and then adaptively uses the learned latent distributions to re-weight the importance of certain data points while training. While our method is generalizable across various data modalities and learning tasks, in this work we use our algorithm to address the issue of racial and gender bias in facial detection systems. We evaluate our algorithm on the Pilot Parliaments Benchmark (PPB), a dataset specifically designed to evaluate biases in computer vision systems, and demonstrate increased overall performance as well as decreased categorical bias with our debiasing approach

    Who Audits the Auditors?

    Get PDF

    Steps Towards Value-Aligned Systems

    Full text link
    Algorithmic (including AI/ML) decision-making artifacts are an established and growing part of our decision-making ecosystem. They are indispensable tools for managing the flood of information needed to make effective decisions in a complex world. The current literature is full of examples of how individual artifacts violate societal norms and expectations (e.g. violations of fairness, privacy, or safety norms). Against this backdrop, this discussion highlights an under-emphasized perspective in the literature on assessing value misalignment in AI-equipped sociotechnical systems. The research on value misalignment has a strong focus on the behavior of individual tech artifacts. This discussion argues for a more structured systems-level approach for assessing value-alignment in sociotechnical systems. We rely primarily on the research on fairness to make our arguments more concrete. And we use the opportunity to highlight how adopting a system perspective improves our ability to explain and address value misalignments better. Our discussion ends with an exploration of priority questions that demand attention if we are to assure the value alignment of whole systems, not just individual artifacts.Comment: Original version appeared in Proceedings of the 2020 AAAI ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES '20), February 7-8, 2020, New York, NY, USA. 5 pages, 2 figures. Corrected some typos in this versio

    50 Years of Test (Un)fairness: Lessons for Machine Learning

    Full text link
    Quantitative definitions of what is unfair and what is fair have been introduced in multiple disciplines for well over 50 years, including in education, hiring, and machine learning. We trace how the notion of fairness has been defined within the testing communities of education and hiring over the past half century, exploring the cultural and social context in which different fairness definitions have emerged. In some cases, earlier definitions of fairness are similar or identical to definitions of fairness in current machine learning research, and foreshadow current formal work. In other cases, insights into what fairness means and how to measure it have largely gone overlooked. We compare past and current notions of fairness along several dimensions, including the fairness criteria, the focus of the criteria (e.g., a test, a model, or its use), the relationship of fairness to individuals, groups, and subgroups, and the mathematical method for measuring fairness (e.g., classification, regression). This work points the way towards future research and measurement of (un)fairness that builds from our modern understanding of fairness while incorporating insights from the past.Comment: FAT* '19: Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '19), January 29--31, 2019, Atlanta, GA, US

    Lessons from Archives: Strategies for Collecting Sociocultural Data in Machine Learning

    Full text link
    A growing body of work shows that many problems in fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics in machine learning systems are rooted in decisions surrounding the data collection and annotation process. In spite of its fundamental nature however, data collection remains an overlooked part of the machine learning (ML) pipeline. In this paper, we argue that a new specialization should be formed within ML that is focused on methodologies for data collection and annotation: efforts that require institutional frameworks and procedures. Specifically for sociocultural data, parallels can be drawn from archives and libraries. Archives are the longest standing communal effort to gather human information and archive scholars have already developed the language and procedures to address and discuss many challenges pertaining to data collection such as consent, power, inclusivity, transparency, and ethics & privacy. We discuss these five key approaches in document collection practices in archives that can inform data collection in sociocultural ML. By showing data collection practices from another field, we encourage ML research to be more cognizant and systematic in data collection and draw from interdisciplinary expertise.Comment: To be published in Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency FAT* '20, January 27-30, 2020, Barcelona, Spain. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 11 page

    Dancing to the Partisan Beat: A First Analysis of Political Communication on TikTok

    Full text link
    TikTok is a video-sharing social networking service, whose popularity is increasing rapidly. It was the world's second-most downloaded app in 2019. Although the platform is known for having users posting videos of themselves dancing, lip-syncing, or showcasing other talents, user-videos expressing political views have seen a recent spurt. This study aims to perform a primary evaluation of political communication on TikTok. We collect a set of US partisan Republican and Democratic videos to investigate how users communicated with each other about political issues. With the help of computer vision, natural language processing, and statistical tools, we illustrate that political communication on TikTok is much more interactive in comparison to other social media platforms, with users combining multiple information channels to spread their messages. We show that political communication takes place in the form of communication trees since users generate branches of responses to existing content. In terms of user demographics, we find that users belonging to both the US parties are young and behave similarly on the platform. However, Republican users generated more political content and their videos received more responses; on the other hand, Democratic users engaged significantly more in cross-partisan discussions.Comment: Accepted as a full paper at the 12th International ACM Web Science Conference (WebSci 2020). Please cite the WebSci version; Second version includes corrected typo
    corecore