Some Optimizers are More Equal: Understanding the Role of Optimizers in Group Fairness
Mojtaba Kolahdouzi, Hatice Gunes, Ali Etemad
Abstract
We study whether and how the choice of optimization algorithm can impact group fairness in deep neural networks. Through stochastic differential equation analysis of optimization dynamics in an analytically tractable setup, we demonstrate that the choice of optimization algorithm indeed influences fairness outcomes, particularly under severe imbalance. Furthermore, we show that when comparing two categories of optimizers, adaptive methods and stochastic methods, RMSProp (from the adaptive category) has a higher likelihood of converging to fairer minima than SGD (from the stochastic category). Building on this insight, we derive two new theoretical guarantees showing that, under appropriate conditions, RMSProp exhibits fairer parameter updates and improved fairness in a single optimization step compared to SGD. We then validate these findings through extensive experiments on three publicly available datasets, namely CelebA, FairFace, and MS-COCO, across different tasks as facial expression recognition, gender classification, and multi-label classification, using various backbones. Considering multiple fairness definitions including equalized odds, equal opportunity, and demographic parity, adaptive optimizers like RMSProp and Adam consistently outperform SGD in terms of group fairness, while maintaining comparable predictive accuracy. Our results highlight the role of adaptive updates as a crucial yet overlooked mechanism for promoting fair outcomes. We release the source code at: https://github.com/Mkolahdoozi/Some-Optimizers-Are-More-Equal.
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 800fdf4f-ab7c-4a1f-a26c-dda6d214d9fcBuilds on19
- Score-Based Generative Modeling through Stochastic Differential EquationsYang Song, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Diederik P. Kingma, Abhishek Kumar et al.ICLR 2021 · 1,270 citations
- An Improved Analysis of Stochastic Gradient Descent with MomentumYanli Liu, Yuan Gao, Wotao YinNeurIPS 2020 · 328 citations
- FairBatch: Batch Selection for Model FairnessYuji Roh, Kangwook Lee, Steven Euijong Whang, Changho SuhICLR 2021 · 156 citations
- On the SDEs and Scaling Rules for Adaptive Gradient AlgorithmsSadhika Malladi, Kaifeng Lyu, Abhishek Panigrahi, Sanjeev AroraNeurIPS 2022 · 125 citations
- Post-processing for Individual FairnessFelix Petersen, Debarghya Mukherjee, Yuekai Sun, Mikhail YurochkinNeurIPS 2021 · 115 citations
Related papers
- FaiREE: fair classification with finite-sample and distribution-free guaranteePuheng Li, James Zou, Linjun ZhangICLR 2023
- The Implicit Bias for Adaptive Optimization Algorithms on Homogeneous Neural NetworksBohan Wang, Qi Meng, Wei Chen, Tie-Yan LiuICML 2021 · 45 citations
- On the Variance of the Adaptive Learning Rate and BeyondLiyuan Liu, Haoming Jiang, Pengcheng He, Weizhu Chen et al.ICLR 2020 · 2,210 citations
- To be Robust or to be Fair: Towards Fairness in Adversarial TrainingHan Xu, Xiaorui Liu, Yaxin Li, Anil K. Jain et al.ICML 2021 · 218 citations
- Momentum Centering and Asynchronous Update for Adaptive Gradient MethodsJuntang Zhuang, Yifan Ding, Tommy Tang, Nicha C. Dvornek et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 9 citations
