Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userAll of the Fairness for Edge Prediction with Optimal Transport
67
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Ievgen Redko
Publication date
2020
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Machine learning and data mining algorithms have been increasingly used recently to support decision-making systems in many areas of high societal importance such as healthcare, education, or security. While being very efficient in their predictive abilities, the deployed algorithms sometimes tend to learn an inductive model with a discriminative bias due to the presence of this latter in the learning sample. This problem gave rise to a new field of algorithmic fairness where the goal is to correct the discriminative bias introduced by a certain attribute in order to decorrelate it from the models output. In this paper, we study the problem of fairness for the task of edge prediction in graphs, a largely underinvestigated scenario compared to a more popular setting of fair classification. To this end, we formulate the problem of fair edge prediction, analyze it theoretically, and propose an embedding-agnostic repairing procedure for the adjacency matrix of an arbitrary graph with a trade-off between the group and individual fairness. We experimentally show the versatility of our approach and its capacity to provide explicit control over different notions of fairness and prediction accuracy.
rate research
Read More
With the current ongoing debate about fairness, explainability and transparency of machine learning models, their application in high-impact clinical decision-making systems must be scrutinized. We consider a real-life example of risk estimation before surgery and investigate the potential for bias or unfairness of a variety of algorithms. Our approach creates transparent documentation of potential bias so that the users can apply the model carefully. We augment a model-card like analysis using propensity scores with a decision-tree based guide for clinicians that would identify predictable shortcomings of the model. In addition to functioning as a guide for users, we propose that it can guide the algorithm development and informatics team to focus on data sources and structures that can address these shortcomings.
There has been a growing concern about the fairness of decision-making systems based on machine learning. The shortage of labeled data has been always a challenging problem facing machine learning based systems. In such scenarios, semi-supervised learning has shown to be an effective way of exploiting unlabeled data to improve upon the performance of model. Notably, unlabeled data do not contain label information which itself can be a significant source of bias in training machine learning systems. This inspired us to tackle the challenge of fairness by formulating the problem in a semi-supervised framework. In this paper, we propose a semi-supervised algorithm using neural networks benefiting from unlabeled data to not just improve the performance but also improve the fairness of the decision-making process. The proposed model, called SSFair, exploits the information in the unlabeled data to mitigate the bias in the training data.
Common fairness definitions in machine learning focus on balancing notions of disparity and utility. In this work, we study fairness in the context of risk disparity among sub-populations. We are interested in learning models that minimize performance discrepancies across sensitive groups without causing unnecessary harm. This is relevant to high-stakes domains such as healthcare, where non-maleficence is a core principle. We formalize this objective using Pareto frontiers, and provide analysis, based on recent works in fairness, to exemplify scenarios were perfect fairness might not be feasible without doing unnecessary harm. We present a methodology for training neural networks that achieve our goal by dynamically re-balancing subgroups risks. We argue that even in domains where fairness at cost is required, finding a non-unnecessary-harm fairness model is the optimal initial step. We demonstrate this methodology on real case-studies of predicting ICU patient mortality, and classifying skin lesions from dermatoscopic images.
In this work we provide a theoretical framework for structured prediction that generalizes the existing theory of surrogate methods for binary and multiclass classification based on estimating conditional probabilities with smooth convex surrogates (e.g. logistic regression). The theory relies on a natural characterization of structural properties of the task loss and allows to derive statistical guarantees for many widely used methods in the context of multilabeling, ranking, ordinal regression and graph matching. In particular, we characterize the smooth convex surrogates compatible with a given task loss in terms of a suitable Bregman divergence composed with a link function. This allows to derive tight bounds for the calibration function and to obtain novel results on existing surrogate frameworks for structured prediction such as conditional random fields and quadratic surrogates.
Standard approaches to group-based notions of fairness, such as emph{parity} and emph{equalized odds}, try to equalize absolute measures of performance across known groups (based on race, gender, etc.). Consequently, a group that is inherently harder to classify may hold back the performance on other groups; and no guarantees can be provided for unforeseen groups. Instead, we propose a fairness notion whose guarantee, on each group $g$ in a class $mathcal{G}$, is relative to the performance of the best classifier on $g$. We apply this notion to broad classes of groups, in particular, where (a) $mathcal{G}$ consists of all possible groups (subsets) in the data, and (b) $mathcal{G}$ is more streamlined. For the first setting, which is akin to groups being completely unknown, we devise the {sc PF} (Proportional Fairness) classifier, which guarantees, on any possible group $g$, an accuracy that is proportional to that of the optimal classifier for $g$, scaled by the relative size of $g$ in the data set. Due to including all possible groups, some of which could be too complex to be relevant, the worst-case theoretical guarantees here have to be proportionally weaker for smaller subsets. For the second setting, we devise the {sc BeFair} (Best-effort Fair) framework which seeks an accuracy, on every $g in mathcal{G}$, which approximates that of the optimal classifier on $g$, independent of the size of $g$. Aiming for such a guarantee results in a non-convex problem, and we design novel techniques to get around this difficulty when $mathcal{G}$ is the set of linear hypotheses. We test our algorithms on real-world data sets, and present interesting comparative insights on their performance.
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
