Framework for developing algorithmic fairness
Dedy Prasetya Kristiadi,Po Abas Sunarya,Melvin Ismanto,Joshua Dylan,Ignasius Raffael Santoso,Harco Leslie Hendric Spits Warnars +5 more
TL;DR: A framework for defining a fair algorithm metric is proposed by compiling information and propositions from various papers into a single summarized list of fairness requirements (guideline alike) so that the researcher can adopt it as a foundation or reference to aid them in developing their interpretation of algorithmic fairness.
read more
Abstract: In a world where the algorithm can control the lives of society, it is not surprising that specific complications in determining the fairness in the algorithmic decision will arise at some point. Machine learning has been the de facto tool to forecast a problem that humans cannot reliably predict without injecting some amount of subjectivity in it (i.e., eliminating the “irrational” nature of humans). In this paper, we proposed a framework for defining a fair algorithm metric by compiling information and propositions from various papers into a single summarized list of fairness requirements (guideline alike). The researcher can then adopt it as a foundation or reference to aid them in developing their interpretation of algorithmic fairness. Therefore, future work for this domain would have a more straightforward development process. We also found while structuring this framework that to develop a concept of fairness that everyone can accept, it would require collaboration with other domain expertise (e.g., social science, law, etc.) to avoid any misinformation or naivety that might occur from that particular subject. That is because this field of algorithmic fairness is far broader than one would think initially; various problems from the multiple points of view could come by unnoticed to the novice’s eye. In the real world, using active discriminator attributes such as religion, race, nation, tribe, religion, and gender become the problems, but in the algorithm, it becomes the fairness reason.
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
References
Sediment Transport and Movable Bed s
Oscar Castro-Orgaz,Willi H. Hager +1 more
- 01 Jan 2019
TL;DR: In this article, sediment is either loaded as bed-load with particles sliding, saltating, and rolling over the river bed, or as a suspended-load, where particles move with the turbulent water flow away from the bed.
43K
•Proceedings Article
Equality of opportunity in supervised learning
Moritz Hardt,Eric Price,Nathan Srebro +2 more
- 05 Dec 2016
TL;DR: This work proposes a criterion for discrimination against a specified sensitive attribute in supervised learning, where the goal is to predict some target based on available features and shows how to optimally adjust any learned predictor so as to remove discrimination according to this definition.
Fairness through awareness
Cynthia Dwork,Moritz Hardt,Toniann Pitassi,Omer Reingold,Richard S. Zemel +4 more
- 08 Jan 2012
TL;DR: A framework for fair classification comprising a (hypothetical) task-specific metric for determining the degree to which individuals are similar with respect to the classification task at hand and an algorithm for maximizing utility subject to the fairness constraint, that similar individuals are treated similarly is presented.
•Posted Content
Fairness Through Awareness
TL;DR: In this article, the authors proposed a framework for fair classification comprising a task-specific metric for determining the degree to which individuals are similar with respect to the classification task at hand, and an algorithm for maximizing utility subject to the fairness constraint that similar individuals are treated similarly.
2.8K
Related Papers (5)
Jared Sylvester,Edward Raff +1 more
Andrew D. Selbst,Solon Barocas +1 more
P Ardu,A Cecchini +1 more
- 01 Jan 2002