arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2004.01840cs.LGstat.ML

Abstracting Fairness: Oracles, Metrics, and Interpretability

Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences(哈佛大学约翰·A·保尔森工程与应用科学学院);Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study(拉德克利夫高等研究院);Microsoft Research(微软研究院);Weizmann Institute of Science(魏茨曼科学研究所)

Cynthia Dwork, Christina Ilvento, Guy N. Rothblum, Pragya Sur

英文摘要:

It is well understood that classification algorithms, for example, for deciding on loan applications, cannot be evaluated for fairness without taking context into account. We examine what can be learned from a fairness oracle equipped with an underlying understanding of ``true'' fairness. The oracle takes as input a (context, classifier) pair satisfying an arbitrary fairness definition, and accepts or rejects the pair according to whether the classifier satisfies the underlying fairness truth. Our principal conceptual result is an extraction procedure that learns the underlying truth; moreover, the procedure can learn an approximation to this truth given access to a weak form of the oracle. Since every ``truly fair'' classifier induces a coarse metric, in which those receiving the same decision are at distance zero from one another and those receiving different decisions are at distance one, this extraction process provides the basis for ensuring a rough form of metric fairness, also known as individual fairness. Our principal technical result is a higher fidelity extractor under a mild technical constraint on the weak oracle's conception of fairness. Our framework permits the scenario in which many classifiers, with differing outcomes, may all be considered fair. Our results have implications for interpretablity -- a highly desired but poorly defined property of classification systems that endeavors to permit a human arbiter to reject classifiers deemed to be ``unfair'' or illegitimately derived.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑