اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدAn exploration of algorithmic discrimination in data and classification
182
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Algorithmic discrimination is an important aspect when data is used for predictive purposes. This paper analyzes the relationships between discrimination and classification, data set partitioning, and decision models, as well as correlation. The paper uses real world data sets to demonstrate the existence of discrimination and the independence between the discrimination of data sets and the discrimination of classification models.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
The most popular face recognition benchmarks assume a distribution of subjects without much attention to their demographic attributes. In this work, we perform a comprehensive discrimination-aware experimentation of deep learning-based face recogniti
on. The main aim of this study is focused on a better understanding of the feature space generated by deep models, and the performance achieved over different demographic groups. We also propose a general formulation of algorithmic discrimination with application to face biometrics. The experiments are conducted over the new DiveFace database composed of 24K identities from six different demographic groups. Two popular face recognition models are considered in the experimental framework: ResNet-50 and VGG-Face. We experimentally show that demographic groups highly represented in popular face databases have led to popular pre-trained deep face models presenting strong algorithmic discrimination. That discrimination can be observed both qualitatively at the feature space of the deep models and quantitatively in large performance differences when applying those models in different demographic groups, e.g. for face biometrics.
Conventional algorithmic fairness is Western in its sub-groups, values, and optimizations. In this paper, we ask how portable the assumptions of this largely Western take on algorithmic fairness are to a different geo-cultural context such as India.
Based on 36 expert interviews with Indian scholars, and an analysis of emerging algorithmic deployments in India, we identify three clusters of challenges that engulf the large distance between machine learning models and oppressed communities in India. We argue that a mere translation of technical fairness work to Indian subgroups may serve only as a window dressing, and instead, call for a collective re-imagining of Fair-ML, by re-contextualising data and models, empowering oppressed communities, and more importantly, enabling ecosystems.
Using the concept of principal stratification from the causal inference literature, we introduce a new notion of fairness, called principal fairness, for human and algorithmic decision-making. The key idea is that one should not discriminate among in
dividuals who would be similarly affected by the decision. Unlike the existing statistical definitions of fairness, principal fairness explicitly accounts for the fact that individuals can be impacted by the decision. We propose an axiomatic assumption that all groups are created equal. This assumption is motivated by a belief that protected attributes such as race and gender should have no direct causal effects on potential outcomes. Under this assumption, we show that principal fairness implies all three existing statistical fairness criteria once we account for relevant covariates. This result also highlights the essential role of conditioning covariates in resolving the previously recognized tradeoffs between the existing statistical fairness criteria. Finally, we discuss how to empirically choose conditioning covariates and then evaluate the principal fairness of a particular decision.
All learning algorithms for recommendations face inevitable and critical trade-off between exploiting partial knowledge of a users preferences for short-term satisfaction and exploring additional user preferences for long-term coverage. Although expl
oration is indispensable for long success of a recommender system, the exploration has been considered as the risk to decrease user satisfaction. The reason for the risk is that items chosen for exploration frequently mismatch with the users interests. To mitigate this risk, recommender systems have mixed items chosen for exploration into a recommendation list, disguising the items as recommendations to elicit feedback on the items to discover the users additional tastes. This mix-in approach has been widely used in many recommenders, but there is rare research, evaluating the effectiveness of the mix-in approach or proposing a new approach for eliciting user feedback without deceiving users. In this work, we aim to propose a new approach for feedback elicitation without any deception and compare our approach to the conventional mix-in approach for evaluation. To this end, we designed a recommender interface that reveals which items are for exploration and conducted a within-subject study with 94 MTurk workers. Our results indicated that users left significantly more feedback on items chosen for exploration with our interface. Besides, users evaluated that our new interface is better than the conventional mix-in interface in terms of novelty, diversity, transparency, trust, and satisfaction. Finally, path analysis show that, in only our new interface, exploration caused to increase user-centric evaluation metrics. Our work paves the way for how to design an interface, which utilizes learning algorithm based on users feedback signals, giving better user experience and gathering more feedback data.
Traditional approaches to ensure group fairness in algorithmic decision making aim to equalize ``total error rates for different subgroups in the population. In contrast, we argue that the fairness approaches should instead focus only on equalizing e
rrors arising due to model uncertainty (a.k.a epistemic uncertainty), caused due to lack of knowledge about the best model or due to lack of data. In other words, our proposal calls for ignoring the errors that occur due to uncertainty inherent in the data, i.e., aleatoric uncertainty. We draw a connection between predictive multiplicity and model uncertainty and argue that the techniques from predictive multiplicity could be used to identify errors made due to model uncertainty. We propose scalable convex proxies to come up with classifiers that exhibit predictive multiplicity and empirically show that our methods are comparable in performance and up to four orders of magnitude faster than the current state-of-the-art. We further propose methods to achieve our goal of equalizing group error rates arising due to model uncertainty in algorithmic decision making and demonstrate the effectiveness of these methods using synthetic and real-world datasets.
الأسئلة المقترحة
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
