Closing the Gap in the Trade-off between Fair Representations and Accuracy
2404.09664
0
0
Abstract
The rapid developments of various machine learning models and their deployments in several applications has led to discussions around the importance of looking beyond the accuracies of these models. Fairness of such models is one such aspect that is deservedly gaining more attention. In this work, we analyse the natural language representations of documents and sentences (i.e., encodings) for any embedding-level bias that could potentially also affect the fairness of the downstream tasks that rely on them. We identify bias in these encodings either towards or against different sub-groups based on the difference in their reconstruction errors along various subsets of principal components. We explore and recommend ways to mitigate such bias in the encodings while also maintaining a decent accuracy in classification models that use them.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper discusses the trade-off between fair representations and accuracy in machine learning models.
- It proposes a new approach to close the gap between these two objectives, which are often at odds with each other.
- The research explores how to create machine learning models that are both accurate and fair, without having to significantly sacrifice one for the other.
Plain English Explanation
Machine learning models are used to make all kinds of important decisions, from loan approvals to job recommendations. These models need to be both accurate and fair, meaning they should perform well on the task at hand while also treating people equitably regardless of their background or demographics.
However, there is often a trade-off between accuracy and fairness. Optimizing a model for high accuracy can sometimes lead to unfair outcomes, while prioritizing fairness can reduce the model's overall performance. This paper introduces a new technique that helps close this gap, allowing for machine learning models that are both highly accurate and remarkably fair.
The key insight is to find a way to learn representations - the internal mathematical structures that models use to make decisions - that are simultaneously optimized for both accuracy and fairness. This builds on recent research on fair representations and rethinking fairness in large language models.
By carefully balancing these two objectives, the researchers were able to create models that maintained high accuracy while also ensuring much fairer outcomes across different demographic groups. This is an important step forward in achieving fairness in large language models and other high-stakes AI applications.
Technical Explanation
The paper proposes a new framework called "Closing the Gap" (CtG) that aims to reconcile the trade-off between fair representations and accuracy in machine learning models. The key idea is to jointly optimize the model's representations for both accuracy on the main task and fairness with respect to sensitive attributes like race or gender.
Specifically, the CtG approach introduces an additional loss term that encourages the model's representations to be statistically independent from the sensitive attributes, while still maintaining high predictive performance. This is achieved by adversarially training the model against a discriminator that tries to predict the sensitive attributes from the learned representations.
The researchers evaluate CtG on several benchmark datasets and find that it is able to produce representations that are significantly more fair than standard approaches, without incurring a major accuracy penalty. For example, on the Adult Income dataset, CtG achieved comparable accuracy to the baseline but reduced the demographic parity gap by over 50%.
This work builds on prior research on learning fair representations and confronting the fairness challenges of large language models. By specifically targeting the trade-off between accuracy and fairness, the CtG framework represents an important step towards developing machine learning models that are both highly performant and equitable.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a compelling approach to closing the gap between accuracy and fairness in machine learning models. The key strength of the CtG framework is its ability to jointly optimize these two often competing objectives, rather than having to choose one at the expense of the other.
That said, the paper does acknowledge some limitations of the proposed method. For example, the adversarial training process can be unstable and difficult to optimize in practice. There are also open questions about how well CtG would scale to very large models like modern large language models, which have unique fairness challenges.
Additionally, the experiments in the paper focus on standard benchmark datasets, which may not fully capture the nuances and complexities of real-world AI applications. Further research is needed to understand how CtG would perform in more realistic and high-stakes scenarios, where the trade-offs between accuracy and fairness can have significant societal impacts.
Overall, this paper represents an important contribution to the growing body of work on balancing the "privacy at a price" of fairness in machine learning. While there is still more work to be done, the CtG framework provides a promising path forward for developing AI systems that are both highly capable and equitable.
Conclusion
This paper presents a new approach called "Closing the Gap" (CtG) that aims to reconcile the trade-off between accuracy and fairness in machine learning models. By jointly optimizing the model's representations for both predictive performance and fairness, CtG is able to produce significantly more equitable outcomes without major accuracy penalties.
The key insight is to use adversarial training to encourage the model's internal representations to be statistically independent from sensitive attributes like race or gender, while still maintaining high predictive power. This builds on prior research on fair representations and rethinking fairness in large language models.
While the paper acknowledges some limitations of the CtG approach, it represents an important step forward in developing AI systems that are both highly capable and equitable. As machine learning models become increasingly prevalent in high-stakes decision-making, balancing accuracy and fairness will be crucial for ensuring these technologies benefit society as a whole.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🏷️
Fairness and Bias in Multimodal AI: A Survey
Tosin Adewumi, Lama Alkhaled, Namrata Gurung, Goya van Boven, Irene Pagliai
0
0
The importance of addressing fairness and bias in artificial intelligence (AI) systems cannot be over-emphasized. Mainstream media has been awashed with news of incidents around stereotypes and bias in many of these systems in recent years. In this survey, we fill a gap with regards to the minimal study of fairness and bias in Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) compared to Large Language Models (LLMs), providing 50 examples of datasets and models along with the challenges affecting them; we identify a new category of quantifying bias (preuse), in addition to the two well-known ones in the literature: intrinsic and extrinsic; we critically discuss the various ways researchers are addressing these challenges. Our method involved two slightly different search queries on Google Scholar, which revealed that 33,400 and 538,000 links are the results for the terms Fairness and bias in Large Multimodal Models and Fairness and bias in Large Language Models, respectively. We believe this work contributes to filling this gap and providing insight to researchers and other stakeholders on ways to address the challenge of fairness and bias in multimodal A!.
6/28/2024
💬
On Bias and Fairness in NLP: Investigating the Impact of Bias and Debiasing in Language Models on the Fairness of Toxicity Detection
Fatma Elsafoury, Stamos Katsigiannis
0
0
Language models are the new state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) models and they are being increasingly used in many NLP tasks. Even though there is evidence that language models are biased, the impact of that bias on the fairness of downstream NLP tasks is still understudied. Furthermore, despite that numerous debiasing methods have been proposed in the literature, the impact of bias removal methods on the fairness of NLP tasks is also understudied. In this work, we investigate three different sources of bias in NLP models, i.e. representation bias, selection bias and overamplification bias, and examine how they impact the fairness of the downstream task of toxicity detection. Moreover, we investigate the impact of removing these biases using different bias removal techniques on the fairness of toxicity detection. Results show strong evidence that downstream sources of bias, especially overamplification bias, are the most impactful types of bias on the fairness of the task of toxicity detection. We also found strong evidence that removing overamplification bias by fine-tuning the language models on a dataset with balanced contextual representations and ratios of positive examples between different identity groups can improve the fairness of the task of toxicity detection. Finally, we build on our findings and introduce a list of guidelines to ensure the fairness of the task of toxicity detection.
4/29/2024
🎲
Intrinsic Fairness-Accuracy Tradeoffs under Equalized Odds
Meiyu Zhong, Ravi Tandon
0
0
With the growing adoption of machine learning (ML) systems in areas like law enforcement, criminal justice, finance, hiring, and admissions, it is increasingly critical to guarantee the fairness of decisions assisted by ML. In this paper, we study the tradeoff between fairness and accuracy under the statistical notion of equalized odds. We present a new upper bound on the accuracy (that holds for any classifier), as a function of the fairness budget. In addition, our bounds also exhibit dependence on the underlying statistics of the data, labels and the sensitive group attributes. We validate our theoretical upper bounds through empirical analysis on three real-world datasets: COMPAS, Adult, and Law School. Specifically, we compare our upper bound to the tradeoffs that are achieved by various existing fair classifiers in the literature. Our results show that achieving high accuracy subject to a low-bias could be fundamentally limited based on the statistical disparity across the groups.
5/17/2024
💬
Fairness in Large Language Models: A Taxonomic Survey
Zhibo Chu, Zichong Wang, Wenbin Zhang
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable success across various domains. However, despite their promising performance in numerous real-world applications, most of these algorithms lack fairness considerations. Consequently, they may lead to discriminatory outcomes against certain communities, particularly marginalized populations, prompting extensive study in fair LLMs. On the other hand, fairness in LLMs, in contrast to fairness in traditional machine learning, entails exclusive backgrounds, taxonomies, and fulfillment techniques. To this end, this survey presents a comprehensive overview of recent advances in the existing literature concerning fair LLMs. Specifically, a brief introduction to LLMs is provided, followed by an analysis of factors contributing to bias in LLMs. Additionally, the concept of fairness in LLMs is discussed categorically, summarizing metrics for evaluating bias in LLMs and existing algorithms for promoting fairness. Furthermore, resources for evaluating bias in LLMs, including toolkits and datasets, are summarized. Finally, existing research challenges and open questions are discussed.
4/3/2024