Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userThe Importance of Modeling Data Missingness in Algorithmic Fairness: A Causal Perspective
352
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Naman Goel
Publication date
2020
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Training datasets for machine learning often have some form of missingness. For example, to learn a model for deciding whom to give a loan, the available training data includes individuals who were given a loan in the past, but not those who were not. This missingness, if ignored, nullifies any fairness guarantee of the training procedure when the model is deployed. Using causal graphs, we characterize the missingness mechanisms in different real-world scenarios. We show conditions under which various distributions, used in popular fairness algorithms, can or can not be recovered from the training data. Our theoretical results imply that many of these algorithms can not guarantee fairness in practice. Modeling missingness also helps to identify correct design principles for fair algorithms. For example, in multi-stage settings where decisions are made in multiple screening rounds, we use our framework to derive the minimal distributions required to design a fair algorithm. Our proposed algorithm decentralizes the decision-making process and still achieves similar performance to the optimal algorithm that requires centralization and non-recoverable distributions.
rate research
Read More
In many application areas---lending, education, and online recommenders, for example---fairness and equity concerns emerge when a machine learning system interacts with a dynamically changing environment to produce both immediate and long-term effects for individuals and demographic groups. We discuss causal directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) as a unifying framework for the recent literature on fairness in such dynamical systems. We show that this formulation affords several new directions of inquiry to the modeler, where causal assumptions can be expressed and manipulated. We emphasize the importance of computing interventional quantities in the dynamical fairness setting, and show how causal assumptions enable simulation (when environment dynamics are known) and off-policy estimation (when dynamics are unknown) of intervention on short- and long-term outcomes, at both the group and individual levels.
Algorithmic fairness has aroused considerable interests in data mining and machine learning communities recently. So far the existing research has been mostly focusing on the development of quantitative metrics to measure algorithm disparities across different protected groups, and approaches for adjusting the algorithm output to reduce such disparities. In this paper, we propose to study the problem of identification of the source of model disparities. Unlike existing interpretation methods which typically learn feature importance, we consider the causal relationships among feature variables and propose a novel framework to decompose the disparity into the sum of contributions from fairness-aware causal paths, which are paths linking the sensitive attribute and the final predictions, on the graph. We also consider the scenario when the directions on certain edges within those paths cannot be determined. Our framework is also model agnostic and applicable to a variety of quantitative disparity measures. Empirical evaluations on both synthetic and real-world data sets are provided to show that our method can provide precise and comprehensive explanations to the model disparities.
Algorithmic fairness has attracted significant attention in recent years, with many quantitative measures suggested for characterizing the fairness of different machine learning algorithms. Despite this interest, the robustness of those fairness measures with respect to an intentional adversarial attack has not been properly addressed. Indeed, most adversarial machine learning has focused on the impact of malicious attacks on the accuracy of the system, without any regard to the systems fairness. We propose new types of data poisoning attacks where an adversary intentionally targets the fairness of a system. Specifically, we propose two families of attacks that target fairness measures. In the anchoring attack, we skew the decision boundary by placing poisoned points near specific target points to bias the outcome. In the influence attack on fairness, we aim to maximize the covariance between the sensitive attributes and the decision outcome and affect the fairness of the model. We conduct extensive experiments that indicate the effectiveness of our proposed attacks.
In the past decade, contextual bandit and reinforcement learning algorithms have been successfully used in various interactive learning systems such as online advertising, recommender systems, and dynamic pricing. However, they have yet to be widely adopted in high-stakes application domains, such as healthcare. One reason may be that existing approaches assume that the underlying mechanisms are static in the sense that they do not change over different environments. In many real world systems, however, the mechanisms are subject to shifts across environments which may invalidate the static environment assumption. In this paper, we tackle the problem of environmental shifts under the framework of offline contextual bandits. We view the environmental shift problem through the lens of causality and propose multi-environment contextual bandits that allow for changes in the underlying mechanisms. We adopt the concept of invariance from the causality literature and introduce the notion of policy invariance. We argue that policy invariance is only relevant if unobserved confounders are present and show that, in that case, an optimal invariant policy is guaranteed to generalize across environments under suitable assumptions. Our results may be a first step towards solving the environmental shift problem. They also establish concrete connections among causality, invariance and contextual bandits.
An effective approach in meta-learning is to utilize multiple train tasks to learn a good initialization for model parameters that can help solve unseen test tasks with very few samples by fine-tuning from this initialization. Although successful in practice, theoretical understanding of such methods is limited. This work studies an important aspect of these methods: splitting the data from each task into train (support) and validation (query) sets during meta-training. Inspired by recent work (Raghu et al., 2020), we view such meta-learning methods through the lens of representation learning and argue that the train-validation split encourages the learned representation to be low-rank without compromising on expressivity, as opposed to the non-splitting variant that encourages high-rank representations. Since sample efficiency benefits from low-rankness, the splitting strategy will require very few samples to solve unseen test tasks. We present theoretical results that formalize this idea for linear representation learning on a subspace meta-learning instance, and experimentally verify this practical benefit of splitting in simulations and on standard meta-learning benchmarks.
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
