Open AccessPosted Content
Algorithmic Fairness
Dana Pessach,Erez Shmueli +1 more
TL;DR: An overview of the main concepts of identifying, measuring and improving algorithmic fairness when using AI algorithms is presented and the most commonly used fairness-related datasets in this field are described.
read more
Abstract: An increasing number of decisions regarding the daily lives of human beings are being controlled by artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in spheres ranging from healthcare, transportation, and education to college admissions, recruitment, provision of loans and many more realms. Since they now touch on many aspects of our lives, it is crucial to develop AI algorithms that are not only accurate but also objective and fair. Recent studies have shown that algorithmic decision-making may be inherently prone to unfairness, even when there is no intention for it. This paper presents an overview of the main concepts of identifying, measuring and improving algorithmic fairness when using AI algorithms. The paper begins by discussing the causes of algorithmic bias and unfairness and the common definitions and measures for fairness. Fairness-enhancing mechanisms are then reviewed and divided into pre-process, in-process and post-process mechanisms. A comprehensive comparison of the mechanisms is then conducted, towards a better understanding of which mechanisms should be used in different scenarios. The paper then describes the most commonly used fairness-related datasets in this field. Finally, the paper ends by reviewing several emerging research sub-fields of algorithmic fairness.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Figures
Table 1. Measures and Definitions for Algorithmic Fairness 
Table 4. Additional Measures and Definitions for Algorithmic Fairness 
Fig. 1. If the SAT scores were used for hiring, then unprivileged candidates with high potential would be excluded, whereas lower potential candidates from the privileged group would be hired instead 
Table 3. Common Benchmark Datasets for Algorithmic Fairness 
Table 2. Pre-Process, In-Process and Post-Process Mechanisms for Algorithmic Fairness
Citations
Artificial Intelligence in Human Resources Management: Challenges and a Path Forward:
TL;DR: There is a substantial gap between the promise and reality of artificial intelligence in human resource (HR) management, and four challenges in using data science techniques for HR management are identified.
848
•Posted Content
Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey.
Simon Caton,Christian Haas +1 more
TL;DR: An overview of the different schools of thought and approaches to mitigating (social) biases and increase fairness in the Machine Learning literature is provided, organises approaches into the widely accepted framework of pre-processing, in- processing, and post-processing methods, subcategorizing into a further 11 method areas.
Algorithmic Fairness: Choices, Assumptions, and Definitions
TL;DR: It is shown how choices and assumptions made—often implicitly—to justify the use of prediction-based decision-making can raise fairness concerns and a notationally consistent catalog of fairness definitions from the literature is presented.
491
A Framework for Understanding Sources of Harm throughout the Machine Learning Life Cycle
Harini Suresh,John V. Guttag +1 more
- 05 Oct 2021
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify seven potential sources of downstream harm in machine learning, spanning data collection, development, and deployment, and propose a framework to facilitate more productive and precise communication around these issues.
417
References
Multistakeholder recommendation with provider constraints
Özge Sürer,Robin Burke,Edward C. Malthouse +2 more
- 27 Sep 2018
TL;DR: A constraint-based integer programming optimization model is proposed, in which different sets of constraints are used to reflect the goals of the different stakeholders, so it can easily be added onto an existing recommendation system to make it multi-stakeholder aware.
•Proceedings Article
Enhancement of the Neutrality in Recommendation.
Toshihiro Kamishima,Shotaro Akaho,Hideki Asoh,Jun Sakuma +3 more
- 01 Jan 2012
TL;DR: This paper implemented information neutral recommendation algorithm by introducing a penalty term to enforce the statistical independence between the target viewpoint and a preference score and empirically shows that the algorithm enhances the independence toward the specified viewpoint.
•Proceedings Article
The Variational Fair Autoencoder
Christos Louizos,Kevin Swersky,Yujia Li,Max Welling,Max Welling,Max Welling,Richard S. Zemel,Richard S. Zemel +7 more
- 01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: In this paper, a variational autoencoding (VAE) model with priors that encourage independence between sensitive and latent factors of variation is proposed. But the model does not address the problem of learning representations that are invariant to certain nuisance or sensitive factors in the data.
•Proceedings Article
Scalable Deletion-Robust Submodular Maximization: Data Summarization with Privacy and Fairness Constraints
Ehsan Kazemi,Morteza Zadimoghaddam,Amin Karbasi +2 more
- 03 Jul 2018
TL;DR: This work proposes the first memory-efficient centralized, streaming, and distributed methods with constant-factor approximation guarantees against any number of adversarial deletions, and shows that the solution is robust against even 80% of data deletion.
•Proceedings Article
The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra dimension
Samira Samadi,Uthaipon Tantipongpipat,Jamie Morgenstern,Mohit Singh,Santosh Vempala +4 more
- 31 Oct 2018
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate whether the standard dimensionality reduction technique of PCA inadvertently produces data representations with different fidelity for two different populations, and give a polynomial-time algorithm for finding a low dimensional representation of the data which is nearly-optimal with respect to this measure.