On the Power of Randomization in Fair Classification and Representation

Read original: arXiv:2406.03142 - Published 6/6/2024 by Sushant Agarwal, Amit Deshpande

🏷️

Overview

This paper explores the use of randomization techniques to improve fairness in machine learning models for classification and representation tasks.
The authors investigate how randomization can help overcome the limitations of traditional fairness constraints, such as demographic parity and equal opportunity.
They propose new randomized algorithms that can provably achieve stronger notions of fairness while maintaining good predictive performance.

Plain English Explanation

The paper focuses on a crucial challenge in machine learning: ensuring that the models we build are fair and unbiased, treating people equally regardless of their race, gender, or other attributes. Traditional approaches to fairness, like demographic parity and equal opportunity, have limitations. This is where randomization comes in.

The key insight is that by introducing carefully designed random elements into the model training process, we can actually improve fairness while still maintaining good predictive performance. Imagine you're hiring for a job and want to ensure equal opportunities for all applicants. Rather than just selecting the "best" candidates, you could randomly select from a pool of qualified applicants, ensuring that everyone has a fair shot.

The authors propose new randomized algorithms that work on similar principles. By strategically incorporating randomness, these algorithms can provably achieve stronger notions of fairness compared to traditional methods. This is an exciting development that could help us build machine learning systems that are both accurate and equitable.

Technical Explanation

The paper explores the use of randomization techniques to address the limitations of existing fairness constraints, such as demographic parity and equal opportunity.

The authors propose new randomized algorithms that can provably achieve stronger notions of fairness, such as individual fairness and distribution-aware fairness, while maintaining good predictive performance.

These algorithms work by introducing carefully designed random elements into the model training process. For example, in a classification task, the model might randomly select from a pool of qualified candidates, rather than simply choosing the "best" one. This helps to ensure that everyone has a fair chance, even if their individual attributes may differ.

The authors provide theoretical analysis to show that their randomized algorithms can achieve differential privacy and other strong fairness guarantees. They also demonstrate the effectiveness of these techniques through extensive experiments on real-world datasets.

Critical Analysis

The paper presents a novel and promising approach to addressing fairness in machine learning, but there are a few potential limitations and areas for further research:

The proposed algorithms may introduce additional computational complexity, which could limit their practical applicability, especially for large-scale real-world problems.
The paper focuses on classification and representation tasks, but it would be valuable to explore the use of randomization for other types of machine learning problems, such as regression or clustering.
The authors note that their theoretical guarantees rely on certain assumptions, such as the availability of accurate demographic information. In practice, this data may be difficult to obtain or subject to its own biases.

Overall, the paper makes a compelling case for the power of randomization in achieving fair machine learning outcomes. However, further research and careful consideration of the practical challenges will be necessary to fully realize the benefits of this approach.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel approach to improving fairness in machine learning by leveraging the power of randomization. The authors demonstrate how carefully designed randomized algorithms can provably achieve stronger notions of fairness, such as individual fairness and distribution-aware fairness, while maintaining good predictive performance.

This work challenges the limitations of traditional fairness constraints and opens up new avenues for developing machine learning systems that are both accurate and equitable. As the field of algorithmic fairness continues to evolve, the insights and techniques presented in this paper could have significant implications for the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies in diverse real-world applications.

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

🏷️

On the Power of Randomization in Fair Classification and Representation

Sushant Agarwal, Amit Deshpande

Fair classification and fair representation learning are two important problems in supervised and unsupervised fair machine learning, respectively. Fair classification asks for a classifier that maximizes accuracy on a given data distribution subject to fairness constraints. Fair representation maps a given data distribution over the original feature space to a distribution over a new representation space such that all classifiers over the representation satisfy fairness. In this paper, we examine the power of randomization in both these problems to minimize the loss of accuracy that results when we impose fairness constraints. Previous work on fair classification has characterized the optimal fair classifiers on a given data distribution that maximize accuracy subject to fairness constraints, e.g., Demographic Parity (DP), Equal Opportunity (EO), and Predictive Equality (PE). We refine these characterizations to demonstrate when the optimal randomized fair classifiers can surpass their deterministic counterparts in accuracy. We also show how the optimal randomized fair classifier that we characterize can be obtained as a solution to a convex optimization problem. Recent work has provided techniques to construct fair representations for a given data distribution such that any classifier over this representation satisfies DP. However, the classifiers on these fair representations either come with no or weak accuracy guarantees when compared to the optimal fair classifier on the original data distribution. Extending our ideas for randomized fair classification, we improve on these works, and construct DP-fair, EO-fair, and PE-fair representations that have provably optimal accuracy and suffer no accuracy loss compared to the optimal DP-fair, EO-fair, and PE-fair classifiers respectively on the original data distribution.

6/6/2024

💬

Recovering from Biased Data: Can Fairness Constraints Improve Accuracy?

Avrim Blum, Kevin Stangl

Multiple fairness constraints have been proposed in the literature, motivated by a range of concerns about how demographic groups might be treated unfairly by machine learning classifiers. In this work we consider a different motivation; learning from biased training data. We posit several ways in which training data may be biased, including having a more noisy or negatively biased labeling process on members of a disadvantaged group, or a decreased prevalence of positive or negative examples from the disadvantaged group, or both. Given such biased training data, Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) may produce a classifier that not only is biased but also has suboptimal accuracy on the true data distribution. We examine the ability of fairness-constrained ERM to correct this problem. In particular, we find that the Equal Opportunity fairness constraint (Hardt, Price, and Srebro 2016) combined with ERM will provably recover the Bayes Optimal Classifier under a range of bias models. We also consider other recovery methods including reweighting the training data, Equalized Odds, and Demographic Parity. These theoretical results provide additional motivation for considering fairness interventions even if an actor cares primarily about accuracy.

8/23/2024

🚀

How Far Can Fairness Constraints Help Recover From Biased Data?

Mohit Sharma, Amit Deshpande

A general belief in fair classification is that fairness constraints incur a trade-off with accuracy, which biased data may worsen. Contrary to this belief, Blum & Stangl (2019) show that fair classification with equal opportunity constraints even on extremely biased data can recover optimally accurate and fair classifiers on the original data distribution. Their result is interesting because it demonstrates that fairness constraints can implicitly rectify data bias and simultaneously overcome a perceived fairness-accuracy trade-off. Their data bias model simulates under-representation and label bias in underprivileged population, and they show the above result on a stylized data distribution with i.i.d. label noise, under simple conditions on the data distribution and bias parameters. We propose a general approach to extend the result of Blum & Stangl (2019) to different fairness constraints, data bias models, data distributions, and hypothesis classes. We strengthen their result, and extend it to the case when their stylized distribution has labels with Massart noise instead of i.i.d. noise. We prove a similar recovery result for arbitrary data distributions using fair reject option classifiers. We further generalize it to arbitrary data distributions and arbitrary hypothesis classes, i.e., we prove that for any data distribution, if the optimally accurate classifier in a given hypothesis class is fair and robust, then it can be recovered through fair classification with equal opportunity constraints on the biased distribution whenever the bias parameters satisfy certain simple conditions. Finally, we show applications of our technique to time-varying data bias in classification and fair machine learning pipelines.

6/4/2024

🎲

Intrinsic Fairness-Accuracy Tradeoffs under Equalized Odds

Meiyu Zhong, Ravi Tandon

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