Supervised Algorithmic Fairness in Distribution Shifts: A Survey
2402.01327
0
0
Abstract
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.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper provides a comprehensive survey of research on supervised algorithmic fairness in the context of distribution shifts.
- It covers the fundamental concepts of algorithmic fairness, the challenges posed by distribution shifts, and the various approaches that have been proposed to address these challenges.
- The survey highlights the importance of ensuring fair and equitable machine learning systems, especially as they are increasingly deployed in high-stakes applications.
Plain English Explanation
When machine learning models are used to make important decisions that impact people's lives, it's crucial that they are fair and unbiased. This can be a challenge, as the data used to train these models may not accurately reflect the real-world diversity of the population. This is known as a "distribution shift" - when the data used for training is different from the data the model is applied to in the real world.
The paper examines the research on how to ensure algorithmic fairness in these situations where the data distribution has shifted. It covers the different ways that fairness can be defined and measured, and the various techniques that have been developed to make machine learning models more robust to distribution shifts and maintain fairness.
Some of the key ideas explored include link to "Quantifying Distribution Shifts & Uncertainties for Enhanced Model Robustness" for quantifying distribution shifts, link to "Self-Organizing Clustering System for Unsupervised Distribution Shift Detection" for detecting distribution shifts, and link to "Predicting Fairness in ML Software Configuration" for ensuring fairness during model deployment.
By surveying this research, the paper provides a comprehensive overview of the state of the art in this critical area of machine learning, which has important implications for building fair and equitable AI systems.
Technical Explanation
The paper begins by defining the key concepts of supervised algorithmic fairness and distribution shifts. Link to "Fairness in Large Language Models: A Taxonomic Survey" Algorithmic fairness refers to the goal of ensuring that machine learning models do not discriminate against certain groups or individuals based on protected characteristics like race, gender, or age. Distribution shifts occur when the data used to train a model differs from the data it is applied to in the real world, which can compromise the model's fairness and performance.
The paper then provides an in-depth review of the various approaches that have been proposed to address the challenge of supervised algorithmic fairness in the face of distribution shifts. These include link to "Fairness and Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: A Multidisciplinary Survey" techniques for quantifying distribution shifts, methods for detecting distribution shifts, and strategies for maintaining fairness during model deployment.
The paper also discusses the trade-offs and limitations of these approaches, highlighting the inherent challenges in balancing competing fairness criteria and the need for further research in this area. It emphasizes the importance of ongoing monitoring and evaluation to ensure that machine learning systems remain fair and unbiased as they are deployed in the real world.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a comprehensive and up-to-date survey of the research on supervised algorithmic fairness in the face of distribution shifts. It clearly articulates the key challenges and the various approaches that have been proposed to address them, making it a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners working in this field.
One potential limitation of the paper is that it primarily focuses on technical solutions, without delving deeply into the societal and ethical implications of these issues. While the paper acknowledges the importance of fairness and the potential harms of biased machine learning systems, a more extensive discussion of the broader social and ethical considerations could have strengthened the analysis.
Additionally, the paper does not explore the potential tensions or trade-offs between different fairness criteria, such as group-level fairness and individual-level fairness. A more nuanced exploration of these issues could have provided a more well-rounded understanding of the challenges involved.
Despite these minor limitations, the paper is a valuable contribution to the growing body of research on algorithmic fairness and distribution shifts. It serves as a useful starting point for researchers and practitioners who are interested in understanding the state of the art in this important area of machine learning.
Conclusion
This survey paper provides a comprehensive overview of the research on supervised algorithmic fairness in the context of distribution shifts. It highlights the critical importance of ensuring fair and equitable machine learning systems, especially as they are increasingly deployed in high-stakes applications.
The paper covers the fundamental concepts of algorithmic fairness, the challenges posed by distribution shifts, and the various technical approaches that have been proposed to address these challenges. By synthesizing the current state of the art in this field, the paper serves as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners working to build more robust and fair AI systems.
While the paper focuses primarily on the technical aspects, it also underscores the broader societal and ethical implications of these issues. As machine learning systems continue to shape important decisions that impact people's lives, the need for continued research and innovation in this area remains paramount.
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 Hub Technical Briefs: Definition and Detection of Distribution Shift
Nicolas Acevedo, Carmen Cortez, Chris Brooks, Rene Kizilcec, Renzhe Yu
0
0
Distribution shift is a common situation in machine learning tasks, where the data used for training a model is different from the data the model is applied to in the real world. This issue arises across multiple technical settings: from standard prediction tasks, to time-series forecasting, and to more recent applications of large language models (LLMs). This mismatch can lead to performance reductions, and can be related to a multiplicity of factors: sampling issues and non-representative data, changes in the environment or policies, or the emergence of previously unseen scenarios. This brief focuses on the definition and detection of distribution shifts in educational settings. We focus on standard prediction problems, where the task is to learn a model that takes in a series of input (predictors) $X=(x_1,x_2,...,x_m)$ and produces an output $Y=f(X)$.
5/24/2024
Algorithmic Fairness Generalization under Covariate and Dependence Shifts Simultaneously
Chen Zhao, Kai Jiang, Xintao Wu, Haoliang Wang, Latifur Khan, Christan Grant, Feng Chen
0
0
The endeavor to preserve the generalization of a fair and invariant classifier across domains, especially in the presence of distribution shifts, becomes a significant and intricate challenge in machine learning. In response to this challenge, numerous effective algorithms have been developed with a focus on addressing the problem of fairness-aware domain generalization. These algorithms are designed to navigate various types of distribution shifts, with a particular emphasis on covariate and dependence shifts. In this context, covariate shift pertains to changes in the marginal distribution of input features, while dependence shift involves alterations in the joint distribution of the label variable and sensitive attributes. In this paper, we introduce a simple but effective approach that aims to learn a fair and invariant classifier by simultaneously addressing both covariate and dependence shifts across domains. We assert the existence of an underlying transformation model can transform data from one domain to another, while preserving the semantics related to non-sensitive attributes and classes. By augmenting various synthetic data domains through the model, we learn a fair and invariant classifier in source domains. This classifier can then be generalized to unknown target domains, maintaining both model prediction and fairness concerns. Extensive empirical studies on four benchmark datasets demonstrate that our approach surpasses state-of-the-art methods.
5/22/2024
💬
On the Need of a Modeling Language for Distribution Shifts: Illustrations on Tabular Datasets
Jiashuo Liu, Tianyu Wang, Peng Cui, Hongseok Namkoong
0
0
Different distribution shifts require different interventions, and algorithms must be grounded in the specific shifts they address. However, methodological development for ''robust'' methods typically relies on structural assumptions that lack empirical validation. Advocating for an empirically grounded inductive approach to research, we build an empirical testbed comprising natural shifts across 5 tabular datasets and 60,000 method configurations encompassing imbalanced learning methods and distributionally robust optimization (DRO) methods. We find $Y|X$-shifts are most prevalent on our testbed, in stark contrast to the heavy focus on $X$ (covariate)-shifts in the ML literature. The performance of ''robust'' methods varies significantly over shift types, and is no better than that of vanilla methods. To understand why, we conduct an in-depth empirical analysis of DRO methods and find that although often neglected by researchers, implementation details -- such as the choice of underlying model class (e.g., XGBoost) and hyperparameter selection -- have a bigger impact on performance than the ambiguity set or its radius. To further bridge that gap between methodological research and practice, we design case studies that illustrate how such a refined, inductive understanding of distribution shifts can enhance both data-centric and algorithmic interventions.
6/26/2024
Beyond Discrepancy: A Closer Look at the Theory of Distribution Shift
Robi Bhattacharjee, Nick Rittler, Kamalika Chaudhuri
0
0
Many machine learning models appear to deploy effortlessly under distribution shift, and perform well on a target distribution that is considerably different from the training distribution. Yet, learning theory of distribution shift bounds performance on the target distribution as a function of the discrepancy between the source and target, rarely guaranteeing high target accuracy. Motivated by this gap, this work takes a closer look at the theory of distribution shift for a classifier from a source to a target distribution. Instead of relying on the discrepancy, we adopt an Invariant-Risk-Minimization (IRM)-like assumption connecting the distributions, and characterize conditions under which data from a source distribution is sufficient for accurate classification of the target. When these conditions are not met, we show when only unlabeled data from the target is sufficient, and when labeled target data is needed. In all cases, we provide rigorous theoretical guarantees in the large sample regime.
5/30/2024