Fairness Guarantees under Demographic Shift
Stephen Giguere, Blossom Metevier, Bruno Castro da Silva, Yuriy Brun, Philip S. Thomas, Scott Niekum
Abstract
Recent studies found that using machine learning for social applications can lead to injustice in the form of racist, sexist, and otherwise unfair and discriminatory outcomes. To address this challenge, recent machine learning algorithms have been designed to limit the likelihood such unfair behavior occurs. However, these approaches typically assume the data used for training is representative of what will be encountered in deployment, which is often untrue. In particular, if certain subgroups of the population become more or less probable in deployment (a phenomenon we call demographic shift ), prior work’s fairness assurances are often invalid. In this paper, we consider the impact of demographic shift and present a class of algorithms, called Shifty algorithms, that provide high-con-fidence behavioral guarantees that hold under demographic shift when data from the deployment environment is unavailable during training. Shifty , the first technique of its kind, demonstrates an effective strategy for designing algorithms to overcome demographic shift’s challenges. We evaluate Shifty using the UCI Adult Census dataset (Kohavi and Becker, 1996), as well as a real-world dataset of university entrance exams and subsequent student success. We show that the learned models avoid bias under demographic shift, unlike existing methods. Our experiments demonstrate that our algorithm’s high-confidence fairness guarantees are valid in practice and that our algorithm is an effective tool for training models that are fair when demographic shift occurs.
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 851d6f39-ccf1-4c6a-9fc2-1796aff86819Cited by top-tier papers24
- Transferring Fairness under Distribution Shifts via Fair Consistency RegularizationBang An, Zora Che, Mucong Ding, Furong HuangNeurIPS 2022 · 44 citations
- "What Data Benefits My Classifier?" Enhancing Model Performance and Interpretability through Influence-Based Data SelectionAnshuman Chhabra, Peizhao Li, Prasant Mohapatra, Hongfu LiuICLR 2024 · 32 citations
- Improving Fair Training under Correlation ShiftsYuji Roh, Kangwook Lee, Steven Euijong Whang, Changho SuhICML 2023 · 22 citations
- Chasing Fairness Under Distribution Shift: A Model Weight Perturbation ApproachZhimeng Stephen Jiang, Xiaotian Han, Hongye Jin, Guanchu Wang et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 22 citations
- My Model is Unfair, Do People Even Care? Visual Design Affects Trust and Perceived Bias in Machine LearningAimen Gaba, Zhanna Kaufman, Jason Cheung, Marie Shvakel et al.IEEE VIS 2023 · 20 citations
Builds on1
Related papers
- Fairness and Accuracy under Domain GeneralizationThai-Hoang Pham, Xueru Zhang, Ping ZhangICLR 2023 · 2 citations
- Fairness Transferability Subject to Bounded Distribution ShiftYatong Chen, Reilly Raab, Jialu Wang, Yang LiuNeurIPS 2022 · 40 citations
- Social Bias Meets Data Bias: The Impacts of Labeling and Measurement Errors on Fairness CriteriaYiqiao Liao, Parinaz NaghizadehAAAI 2023 · 15 citations
- Domain Adaptation meets Individual Fairness. And they get alongDebarghya Mukherjee, Felix Petersen, Mikhail Yurochkin, Yuekai SunNeurIPS 2022 · 20 citations
- Does enforcing fairness mitigate biases caused by subpopulation shift?Subha Maity, Debarghya Mukherjee, Mikhail Yurochkin, Yuekai SunNeurIPS 2021 · 32 citations
