On the Within-Group Fairness of Screening Classifiers
Nastaran Okati, Stratis Tsirtsis, Manuel Gomez Rodriguez
Abstract
Screening classifiers are increasingly used to identify qualified candidates in a variety of selection processes. In this context, it has been recently shown that, if a classifier is calibrated, one can identify the smallest set of candidates which contains, in expectation, a desired number of qualified candidates using a threshold decision rule. This lends support to focusing on calibration as the only requirement for screening classifiers. In this paper, we argue that screening policies that use calibrated classifiers may suffer from an understudied type of within-group unfairness -- they may unfairly treat qualified members within demographic groups of interest. Further, we argue that this type of unfairness can be avoided if classifiers satisfy within-group monotonicity, a natural monotonicity property within each of the groups. Then, we introduce an efficient post-processing algorithm based on dynamic programming to minimally modify a given calibrated classifier so that its probability estimates satisfy within-group monotonicity. We validate our algorithm using US Census survey data and show that within-group monotonicity can be often achieved at a small cost in terms of prediction granularity and shortlist size.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 78c4b7e6-c5be-44ea-8c00-b7f99f131038Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on9
- Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine LearningFrances Ding, Moritz Hardt, John Miller, Ludwig SchmidtNeurIPS 2021 · 671 citations
- Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted LearningPreethi Lahoti, Alex Beutel, Jilin Chen, Kang Lee et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 406 citations
- Improving model calibration with accuracy versus uncertainty optimizationRanganath Krishnan, Omesh TickooNeurIPS 2020 · 217 citations
- Soft Calibration Objectives for Neural NetworksArchit Karandikar, Nicholas Cain, Dustin Tran, Balaji Lakshminarayanan et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 127 citations
- Distribution-free binary classification: prediction sets, confidence intervals and calibrationChirag Gupta, Aleksandr Podkopaev, Aaditya RamdasNeurIPS 2020 · 105 citations
Related papers
- Improving Screening Processes via Calibrated Subset SelectionLequn Wang, Thorsten Joachims, Manuel Gomez RodriguezICML 2022 · 21 citations
- Fair Decisions from Calibrated Scores: Achieving Optimal Classification While Satisfying SufficiencyEtam Benger, Katrina LigettICML 2026
- Fair Sequential Selection Using Supervised Learning ModelsMohammad Mahdi Khalili, Xueru Zhang, Mahed AbroshanNeurIPS 2021 · 25 citations
- Fair Bayes-Optimal Classifiers Under Predictive ParityXianli Zeng, Edgar Dobriban, Guang ChengNeurIPS 2022 · 21 citations
- Group-Aware Threshold Adaptation for Fair ClassificationTaeuk Jang, Pengyi Shi, Xiaoqian WangAAAI 2022 · 49 citations
