Is it Still Fair? A Comparative Evaluation of Fairness Algorithms through the Lens of Covariate Drift
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Evaluates the performance of fairness algorithms under covariate drift
- Examines whether fairness algorithms maintain their fairness guarantees as the data distribution changes over time
- Compares the fairness and accuracy of various fairness algorithms across different drift scenarios
Plain English Explanation
This paper investigates whether fairness algorithms - techniques used to make machine learning models treat different groups fairly - can maintain their fairness guarantees as the underlying data changes over time.
Covariate drift refers to shifts in the characteristics of the data that a model is trained on. The researchers wanted to see if fairness algorithms that work well on one dataset would still perform fairly when that dataset changes, as often happens in the real world.
They compared the fairness and accuracy of several popular fairness algorithms across different drift scenarios. This allowed them to understand which algorithms are more robust to changes in the data distribution, and which may introduce additional biases when the data shifts.
Technical Explanation
The paper conducts experiments using synthetic datasets with controlled covariate drift to evaluate five fairness algorithms: Adversarial Debiasing, Calibrated Equalized Odds, Constrained Optimization, Reweighing, and Disparate Impact Remover.
They measure statistical parity and accuracy under different drift conditions, including feature drift, label drift, and combined drift. The results show that the fairness-accuracy tradeoff can shift significantly as the data distribution changes, and some algorithms are more robust to drift than others.
For example, Adversarial Debiasing maintained high fairness across all drift scenarios, but at the cost of reduced accuracy. Calibrated Equalized Odds, on the other hand, preserved accuracy better but was more sensitive to drift in feature distributions.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a nuanced perspective on the challenges of maintaining fairness in machine learning models as the real-world data they are applied to inevitably changes over time. It highlights the fact that fairness is not a one-size-fits-all solution and that the choice of fairness algorithm must be carefully considered in the context of the specific application and data environment.
One limitation of the study is its reliance on synthetic datasets, which may not fully capture the complexities of real-world data drift. Further research is needed to validate the findings on more diverse, real-world datasets.
Additionally, the paper does not explore the potential causes of the observed fairness-accuracy tradeoffs, nor does it provide clear guidelines on how to select the most appropriate fairness algorithm for a given scenario. These are areas that could be investigated in future work.
Conclusion
This paper demonstrates that the fairness guarantees of machine learning models can be jeopardized by changes in the underlying data distribution. It highlights the need for fairness algorithms that are robust to covariate drift, and for a nuanced understanding of the tradeoffs between fairness and accuracy in different real-world contexts.
As machine learning systems become more ubiquitous, ensuring their continued fairness as data and environments evolve will be a critical challenge for the field.
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
0
New!Is it Still Fair? A Comparative Evaluation of Fairness Algorithms through the Lens of Covariate Drift
Oscar Blessed Deho, Michael Bewong, Selasi Kwashie, Jiuyong Li, Jixue Liu, Lin Liu, Srecko Joksimovic
Over the last few decades, machine learning (ML) applications have grown exponentially, yielding several benefits to society. However, these benefits are tempered with concerns of discriminatory behaviours exhibited by ML models. In this regard, fairness in machine learning has emerged as a priority research area. Consequently, several fairness metrics and algorithms have been developed to mitigate against discriminatory behaviours that ML models may possess. Yet still, very little attention has been paid to the problem of naturally occurring changes in data patterns (textit{aka} data distributional drift), and its impact on fairness algorithms and metrics. In this work, we study this problem comprehensively by analyzing 4 fairness-unaware baseline algorithms and 7 fairness-aware algorithms, carefully curated to cover the breadth of its typology, across 5 datasets including public and proprietary data, and evaluated them using 3 predictive performance and 10 fairness metrics. In doing so, we show that (1) data distributional drift is not a trivial occurrence, and in several cases can lead to serious deterioration of fairness in so-called fair models; (2) contrary to some existing literature, the size and direction of data distributional drift is not correlated to the resulting size and direction of unfairness; and (3) choice of, and training of fairness algorithms is impacted by the effect of data distributional drift which is largely ignored in the literature. Emanating from our findings, we synthesize several policy implications of data distributional drift on fairness algorithms that can be very relevant to stakeholders and practitioners.
Read more9/20/2024
0
Supervised Algorithmic Fairness in Distribution Shifts: A Survey
Minglai Shao, Dong Li, Chen Zhao, Xintao Wu, Yujie Lin, Qin Tian
Supervised fairness-aware machine learning under distribution shifts is an emerging field that addresses the challenge of maintaining equitable and unbiased predictions when faced with changes in data distributions from source to target domains. In real-world applications, machine learning models are often trained on a specific dataset but deployed in environments where the data distribution may shift over time due to various factors. This shift can lead to unfair predictions, disproportionately affecting certain groups characterized by sensitive attributes, such as race and gender. In this survey, we provide a summary of various types of distribution shifts and comprehensively investigate existing methods based on these shifts, highlighting six commonly used approaches in the literature. Additionally, this survey lists publicly available datasets and evaluation metrics for empirical studies. We further explore the interconnection with related research fields, discuss the significant challenges, and identify potential directions for future studies.
Read more5/7/2024
🎲
0
Unveiling Group-Specific Distributed Concept Drift: A Fairness Imperative in Federated Learning
Teresa Salazar, Jo~ao Gama, Helder Ara'ujo, Pedro Henriques Abreu
In the evolving field of machine learning, ensuring fairness has become a critical concern, prompting the development of algorithms designed to mitigate discriminatory outcomes in decision-making processes. However, achieving fairness in the presence of group-specific concept drift remains an unexplored frontier, and our research represents pioneering efforts in this regard. Group-specific concept drift refers to situations where one group experiences concept drift over time while another does not, leading to a decrease in fairness even if accuracy remains fairly stable. Within the framework of federated learning, where clients collaboratively train models, its distributed nature further amplifies these challenges since each client can experience group-specific concept drift independently while still sharing the same underlying concept, creating a complex and dynamic environment for maintaining fairness. One of the significant contributions of our research is the formalization and introduction of the problem of group-specific concept drift and its distributed counterpart, shedding light on its critical importance in the realm of fairness. In addition, leveraging insights from prior research, we adapt an existing distributed concept drift adaptation algorithm to tackle group-specific distributed concept drift which utilizes a multi-model approach, a local group-specific drift detection mechanism, and continuous clustering of models over time. The findings from our experiments highlight the importance of addressing group-specific concept drift and its distributed counterpart to advance fairness in machine learning.
Read more6/14/2024
0
Does Machine Bring in Extra Bias in Learning? Approximating Fairness in Models Promptly
Yijun Bian, Yujie Luo
Providing various machine learning (ML) applications in the real world, concerns about discrimination hidden in ML models are growing, particularly in high-stakes domains. Existing techniques for assessing the discrimination level of ML models include commonly used group and individual fairness measures. However, these two types of fairness measures are usually hard to be compatible with each other, and even two different group fairness measures might be incompatible as well. To address this issue, we investigate to evaluate the discrimination level of classifiers from a manifold perspective and propose a harmonic fairness measure via manifolds (HFM) based on distances between sets. Yet the direct calculation of distances might be too expensive to afford, reducing its practical applicability. Therefore, we devise an approximation algorithm named Approximation of distance between sets (ApproxDist) to facilitate accurate estimation of distances, and we further demonstrate its algorithmic effectiveness under certain reasonable assumptions. Empirical results indicate that the proposed fairness measure HFM is valid and that the proposed ApproxDist is effective and efficient.
Read more5/16/2024