Evaluating Fairness in Black-box Algorithmic Markets: A Case Study of Ride Sharing in Chicago

Read original: arXiv:2407.20522 - Published 7/31/2024 by Yuhan Liu, Yuhan Zheng, Siyuan Zhang, Lydia T. Liu

Evaluating Fairness in Black-box Algorithmic Markets: A Case Study of Ride Sharing in Chicago

Overview

This paper evaluates fairness in black-box algorithmic markets, using a case study of ride sharing in Chicago.
The researchers aimed to understand how algorithmic decisions in ride sharing platforms impact different demographic groups.
They collected data on ride requests, wait times, and prices across different neighborhoods in Chicago.
The analysis revealed disparities in service quality and pricing for riders in low-income and majority-minority neighborhoods.

Plain English Explanation

The researchers looked at how the algorithms used by ride sharing companies, like Uber and Lyft, affect different groups of people. They focused on the city of Chicago and collected data on things like how long people had to wait for a ride, how much they paid, and where they lived.

The findings showed that the ride sharing algorithms didn't treat everyone equally. People living in low-income or mostly non-white neighborhoods often had to wait longer for a ride and pay higher prices compared to people in wealthier, whiter areas. This suggests the algorithms used by these companies may be unfairly discriminating against certain communities.

Technical Explanation

The researchers collected data on ride requests, wait times, and prices from a major ride sharing platform in Chicago. They analyzed this data to understand how the algorithmic decisions made by the platform affected different demographic groups across the city.

The analysis revealed significant disparities in service quality and pricing. Riders in low-income and majority-minority neighborhoods faced longer wait times and higher prices compared to riders in wealthier, whiter areas of the city. These findings suggest the platform's algorithms may be systematically discriminating against certain communities.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides important insights into the potential unfairness of algorithmic decision-making in ride sharing markets. However, it is limited to a single city and a single platform, so the findings may not generalize to other contexts.

Additionally, the paper does not delve into the specific mechanisms behind the algorithmic discrimination observed. Further research is needed to understand the technical details of how these algorithms operate and the factors contributing to the disparate impacts.

Conclusion

This study highlights the importance of closely examining the fairness of algorithmic systems, especially in domains like ride sharing that can have significant impacts on people's daily lives. The findings suggest ride sharing platforms need to carefully audit their algorithms and take steps to ensure equitable service across all communities. Ongoing research and public scrutiny will be crucial to promoting fairness in these emerging algorithmic markets.

This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

Evaluating Fairness in Black-box Algorithmic Markets: A Case Study of Ride Sharing in Chicago

Yuhan Liu, Yuhan Zheng, Siyuan Zhang, Lydia T. Liu

This study examines fairness within the rideshare industry, focusing on both drivers' wages and riders' trip fares. Through quantitative analysis, we found that drivers' hourly wages are significantly influenced by factors such as race/ethnicity, health insurance status, tenure to the platform, and working hours. Despite platforms' policies not intentionally embedding biases, disparities persist based on these characteristics. For ride fares, we propose a method to audit the pricing policy of a proprietary algorithm by replicating it; we conduct a hypothesis test to determine if the predicted rideshare fare is greater than the taxi fare, taking into account the approximation error in the replicated model. Challenges in accessing data and transparency hinder our ability to isolate discrimination from other factors, underscoring the need for collaboration with rideshare platforms and drivers to enhance fairness in algorithmic wage determination and pricing.

7/31/2024

Long-term Fairness in Ride-Hailing Platform

Yufan Kang, Jeffrey Chan, Wei Shao, Flora D. Salim, Christopher Leckie

Matching in two-sided markets such as ride-hailing has recently received significant attention. However, existing studies on ride-hailing mainly focus on optimising efficiency, and fairness issues in ride-hailing have been neglected. Fairness issues in ride-hailing, including significant earning differences between drivers and variance of passenger waiting times among different locations, have potential impacts on economic and ethical aspects. The recent studies that focus on fairness in ride-hailing exploit traditional optimisation methods and the Markov Decision Process to balance efficiency and fairness. However, there are several issues in these existing studies, such as myopic short-term decision-making from traditional optimisation and instability of fairness in a comparably longer horizon from both traditional optimisation and Markov Decision Process-based methods. To address these issues, we propose a dynamic Markov Decision Process model to alleviate fairness issues currently faced by ride-hailing, and seek a balance between efficiency and fairness, with two distinct characteristics: (i) a prediction module to predict the number of requests that will be raised in the future from different locations to allow the proposed method to consider long-term fairness based on the whole timeline instead of consider fairness only based on historical and current data patterns; (ii) a customised scalarisation function for multi-objective multi-agent Q Learning that aims to balance efficiency and fairness. Extensive experiments on a publicly available real-world dataset demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods.

7/26/2024

🤖

Rideshare Transparency: Translating Gig Worker Insights on AI Platform Design to Policy

Varun Nagaraj Rao, Samantha Dalal, Eesha Agarwal, Dana Calacci, Andr'es Monroy-Hern'andez

Rideshare platforms exert significant control over workers through algorithmic systems that can result in financial, emotional, and physical harm. What steps can platforms, designers, and practitioners take to mitigate these negative impacts and meet worker needs? In this paper, through a novel mixed methods study combining a LLM-based analysis of over 1 million comments posted to online platform worker communities with semi-structured interviews of workers, we thickly characterize transparency-related harms, mitigation strategies, and worker needs while validating and contextualizing our findings within the broader worker community. Our findings expose a transparency gap between existing platform designs and the information drivers need, particularly concerning promotions, fares, routes, and task allocation. Our analysis suggests that rideshare workers need key pieces of information, which we refer to as indicators, to make informed work decisions. These indicators include details about rides, driver statistics, algorithmic implementation details, and platform policy information. We argue that instead of relying on platforms to include such information in their designs, new regulations that require platforms to publish public transparency reports may be a more effective solution to improve worker well-being. We offer recommendations for implementing such a policy.

6/21/2024

➖

Towards the Socio-Algorithmic Construction of Fairness: The Case of Automatic Price-Surging in Ride-Hailing

Mateusz Dolata, Gerhard Schwabe

Algorithms take decisions that affect humans, and have been shown to perpetuate biases and discrimination. Decisions by algorithms are subject to different interpretations. Algorithms' behaviors are basis for the construal of moral assessment and standards. Yet we lack an understanding of how algorithms impact on social construction processes, and vice versa. Without such understanding, social construction processes may be disrupted and, eventually, may impede moral progress in society. We analyze the public discourse that emerged after a significant (five-fold) price-surge following the Brooklyn Subway Shooting on April 12, 2022, in New York City. There was much controversy around the two ride-hailing firms' algorithms' decisions. The discussions evolved around various notions of fairness and the algorithms' decisions' justifiability. Our results indicate that algorithms, even if not explicitly addressed in the discourse, strongly impact on constructing fairness assessments and notions. They initiate the exchange, form people's expectations, evoke people's solidarity with specific groups, and are a vehicle for moral crusading. However, they are also subject to adjustments based on social forces. We claim that the process of constructing notions of fairness is no longer just social; it has become a socio-algorithmic process. We propose a theory of socio-algorithmic construction as a mechanism for establishing notions of fairness and other ethical constructs.

8/12/2024