Lune

CHI2023Top-tier venue

Fairness Evaluation in Text Classification: Machine Learning Practitioner Perspectives of Individual and Group Fairness

Zahra Ashktorab, Benjamin Hoover, Mayank Agarwal, Casey Dugan, Werner Geyer, Hao Bang Yang, Mikhail Yurochkin

2023Year
13Citations
4Top-tier citations

Abstract

Mitigating algorithmic bias is a critical task in the development and deployment of machine learning models. While several toolkits exist to aid machine learning practitioners in addressing fairness issues, little is known about the strategies practitioners employ to evaluate model fairness and what factors influence their assessment, particularly in the context of text classification. Two common approaches of evaluating the fairness of a model are group fairness and individual fairness. We run a study with Machine Learning practitioners (n=24) to understand the strategies used to evaluate models. Metrics presented to practitioners (group vs. individual fairness) impact which models they consider fair. Participants focused on risks associated with underpredicting / overpredicting and model sensitivity relative to identity token manipulations. We discover fairness assessment strategies involving personal experiences or how users form groups of identity tokens to test model fairness. We provide recommendations for interactive tools for evaluating fairness in text classification.

• Human-centered computing → Human computer interaction (HCI).

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.

Questions to start from

Your agent calls

Luneget_paper_fulltext

Ask in Lune

Free to start. No credit card required.

lune papers fulltext c5db418a-bf55-406b-8d78-8fa5cdd06d08

Cited by top-tier papers4

Ask how each one uses it

Builds on11

Related papers

Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines