Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userAn Empirical Study of Rich Subgroup Fairness for Machine Learning
86
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Kearns et al. [2018] recently proposed a notion of rich subgroup fairness intended to bridge the gap between statistical and individual notions of fairness. Rich subgroup fairness picks a statistical fairness constraint (say, equalizing false positive rates across protected groups), but then asks that this constraint hold over an exponentially or infinitely large collection of subgroups defined by a class of functions with bounded VC dimension. They give an algorithm guaranteed to learn subject to this constraint, under the condition that it has access to oracles for perfectly learning absent a fairness constraint. In this paper, we undertake an extensive empirical evaluation of the algorithm of Kearns et al. On four real datasets for which fairness is a concern, we investigate the basic convergence of the algorithm when instantiated with fast heuristics in place of learning oracles, measure the tradeoffs between fairness and accuracy, and compare this approach with the recent algorithm of Agarwal et al. [2018], which implements weaker and more traditional marginal fairness constraints defined by individual protected attributes. We find that in general, the Kearns et al. algorithm converges quickly, large gains in fairness can be obtained with mild costs to accuracy, and that optimizing accuracy subject only to marginal fairness leads to classifiers with substantial subgroup unfairness. We also provide a number of analyses and visualizations of the dynamics and behavior of the Kearns et al. algorithm. Overall we find this algorithm to be effective on real data, and rich subgroup fairness to be a viable notion in practice.
rate research
Read More
The black-box nature of machine learning models hinders the deployment of some high-accuracy models in medical diagnosis. It is risky to put ones life in the hands of models that medical researchers do not fully understand. However, through model interpretation, black-box models can promptly reveal significant biomarkers that medical practitioners may have overlooked due to the surge of infected patients in the COVID-19 pandemic. This research leverages a database of 92 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 laboratory tests between 18th Jan. 2020 and 5th Mar. 2020, in Zhuhai, China, to identify biomarkers indicative of severity prediction. Through the interpretation of four machine learning models, decision tree, random forests, gradient boosted trees, and neural networks using permutation feature importance, Partial Dependence Plot (PDP), Individual Conditional Expectation (ICE), Accumulated Local Effects (ALE), Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME), and Shapley Additive Explanation (SHAP), we identify an increase in N-Terminal pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NTproBNP), C-Reaction Protein (CRP), and lactic dehydrogenase (LDH), a decrease in lymphocyte (LYM) is associated with severe infection and an increased risk of death, which is consistent with recent medical research on COVID-19 and other research using dedicated models. We further validate our methods on a large open dataset with 5644 confirmed patients from the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, at S~ao Paulo, Brazil from Kaggle, and unveil leukocytes, eosinophils, and platelets as three indicative biomarkers for COVID-19.
If our models are used in new or unexpected cases, do we know if they will make fair predictions? Previously, researchers developed ways to debias a model for a single problem domain. However, this is often not how models are trained and used in practice. For example, labels and demographics (sensitive attributes) are often hard to observe, resulting in auxiliary or synthetic data to be used for training, and proxies of the sensitive attribute to be used for evaluation of fairness. A model trained for one setting may be picked up and used in many others, particularly as is common with pre-training and cloud APIs. Despite the pervasiveness of these complexities, remarkably little work in the fairness literature has theoretically examined these issues. We frame all of these settings as domain adaptation problems: how can we use what we have learned in a source domain to debias in a new target domain, without directly debiasing on the target domain as if it is a completely new problem? We offer new theoretical guarantees of improving fairness across domains, and offer a modeling approach to transfer to data-sparse target domains. We give empirical results validating the theory and showing that these modeling approaches can improve fairness metrics with less data.
Many proposed methods for explaining machine learning predictions are in fact challenging to understand for nontechnical consumers. This paper builds upon an alternative consumer-driven approach called TED that asks for explanations to be provided in training data, along with target labels. Using semi-synthetic data from credit approval and employee retention applications, experiments are conducted to investigate some practical considerations with TED, including its performance with different classification algorithms, varying numbers of explanations, and variability in explanations. A new algorithm is proposed to handle the case where some training examples do not have explanations. Our results show that TED is robust to increasing numbers of explanations, noisy explanations, and large fractions of missing explanations, thus making advances toward its practical deployment.
Inspired by the phenomenon of catastrophic forgetting, we investigate the learning dynamics of neural networks as they train on single classification tasks. Our goal is to understand whether a related phenomenon occurs when data does not undergo a clear distributional shift. We define a `forgetting event to have occurred when an individual training example transitions from being classified correctly to incorrectly over the course of learning. Across several benchmark data sets, we find that: (i) certain examples are forgotten with high frequency, and some not at all; (ii) a data sets (un)forgettable examples generalize across neural architectures; and (iii) based on forgetting dynamics, a significant fraction of examples can be omitted from the training data set while still maintaining state-of-the-art generalization performance.
Many machine learning systems make extensive use of large amounts of data regarding human behaviors. Several researchers have found various discriminatory practices related to the use of human-related machine learning systems, for example in the field of criminal justice, credit scoring and advertising. Fair machine learning is therefore emerging as a new field of study to mitigate biases that are inadvertently incorporated into algorithms. Data scientists and computer engineers are making various efforts to provide definitions of fairness. In this paper, we provide an overview of the most widespread definitions of fairness in the field of machine learning, arguing that the ideas highlighting each formalization are closely related to different ideas of justice and to different interpretations of democracy embedded in our culture. This work intends to analyze the definitions of fairness that have been proposed to date to interpret the underlying criteria and to relate them to different ideas of democracy.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
