Automated decision systems are increasingly used for consequential decision making -- for a variety of reasons. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque models, which do not (or hardly) allow for understanding how or why a given decision was arrived at. This is not only problematic from a legal perspective, but non-transparent systems are also prone to yield undesirable (e.g., unfair) outcomes because their sanity is difficult to assess and calibrate in the first place. In this work, we conduct a study to evaluate different attempts of explaining such systems with respect to their effect on people's perceptions of fairness and trustworthiness towards the underlying mechanisms. A pilot study revealed surprising qualitative insights as well as preliminary significant effects, which will have to be verified, extended and thoroughly discussed in the larger main study.
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)（卡尔斯鲁厄理工学院）
It is often argued that one goal of explaining automated decision systems (ADS) is to facilitate positive perceptions (e.g., fairness or trustworthiness) of users towards such systems. This viewpoint, however, makes the implicit assumption that a given ADS is fair and trustworthy, to begin with. If the ADS issues unfair outcomes, then one might expect that explanations regarding the system's workings will reveal its shortcomings and, hence, lead to a decrease in fairness perceptions. Consequently, we suggest that it is more meaningful to evaluate explanations against their effectiveness in ena…
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology（卡尔斯鲁厄理工学院）；University of Texas at Austin（德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校）
It is known that recommendations of AI-based systems can be incorrect or unfair. Hence, it is often proposed that a human be the final decision-maker. Prior work has argued that explanations are an essential pathway to help human decision-makers enhance decision quality and mitigate bias, i.e., facilitate human-AI complementarity. For these benefits to materialize, explanations should enable humans to appropriately rely on AI recommendations and override the algorithmic recommendation when necessary to increase distributive fairness of decisions. The literature, however, does not provide concl…
RWTH Aachen University（亚琛工业大学）；GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences（GESIS - 莱布尼茨社会科学研究所）
Measures of algorithmic fairness often do not account for human perceptions of fairness that can substantially vary between different sociodemographics and stakeholders. The FairCeptron framework is an approach for studying perceptions of fairness in algorithmic decision making such as in ranking or classification. It supports (i) studying human perceptions of fairness and (ii) comparing these human perceptions with measures of algorithmic fairness. The framework includes fairness scenario generation, fairness perception elicitation and fairness perception analysis. We demonstrate the FairCept…
Automated decision systems (ADS) have become ubiquitous in many high-stakes domains. Those systems typically involve sophisticated yet opaque artificial intelligence (AI) techniques that seldom allow for full comprehension of their inner workings, particularly for affected individuals. As a result, ADS are prone to deficient oversight and calibration, which can lead to undesirable (e.g., unfair) outcomes. In this work, we conduct an online study with 200 participants to examine people's perceptions of fairness and trustworthiness towards ADS in comparison to a scenario where a human instead of…
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf（海因里希·海涅杜塞尔多夫大学）
Algorithmic decision-making (ADM) increasingly shapes people's daily lives. Given that such autonomous systems can cause severe harm to individuals and social groups, fairness concerns have arisen. A human-centric approach demanded by scholars and policymakers requires taking people's fairness perceptions into account when designing and implementing ADM. We provide a comprehensive, systematic literature review synthesizing the existing empirical insights on perceptions of algorithmic fairness from 39 empirical studies spanning multiple domains and scientific disciplines. Through thorough codin…
Public Perceptions of Fairness Metrics Across Borders
The University of Osaka（大阪大学）；Kyoto University（京都大学）；Tokyo Metropolitan University（东京 Metropolitan 大学）；The University of Tokyo（东京大学）；Eindhoven University of Technology（埃因霍温理工大学）；University of Copenhagen（哥本哈根大学）
Algorithmic fairness is a major concern in recent years as the influence of machine learning algorithms becomes more widespread. In this paper, we investigate the issue of algorithmic fairness from a network-centric perspective. Specifically, we introduce a novel yet intuitive function known as network-centric fairness perception and provide an axiomatic approach to analyze its properties. Using a peer-review network as case study, we also examine its utility in terms of assessing the perception of fairness in paper acceptance decisions. We show how the function can be extended to a group fair…
Automated decision systems (ADS) are increasingly used for consequential decision-making. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque machine learning models, which do not allow for understanding how a given decision was arrived at. In this work, we conduct a human subject study to assess people's perceptions of informational fairness (i.e., whether people think they are given adequate information on and explanation of the process and its outcomes) and trustworthiness of an underlying ADS when provided with varying types of information about the system. More specifically, we instantia…
Anthropomorphism on Risk Perception: The Role of Trust and Domain Knowledge in Decision-Support AI
School of Management and Economics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen（管理学院和经济学系，香港中文大学（深圳））；Computational Media and Arts, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou)（计算媒体与艺术，香港科学与技术大学（广州））
University of Waterloo（滑铁卢大学）；DarwinAI Corp.（达尔文人工智能公司）；Waterloo Artificial Intelligence Institute（滑铁卢人工智能研究所）
The success of deep learning in recent years have led to a significant increase in interest and prevalence for its adoption to tackle financial services tasks. One particular question that often arises as a barrier to adopting deep learning for financial services is whether the developed financial deep learning models are fair in their predictions, particularly in light of strong governance and regulatory compliance requirements in the financial services industry. A fundamental aspect of fairness that has not been explored in financial deep learning is the concept of trust, whose variations ma…
Department of Computer Science（计算机科学系）；Department of Cognitive Sciences University of California, Irvine（加州大学尔湾分校认知科学系）
We investigate the problem of reliably assessing group fairness when labeled examples are few but unlabeled examples are plentiful. We propose a general Bayesian framework that can augment labeled data with unlabeled data to produce more accurate and lower-variance estimates compared to methods based on labeled data alone. Our approach estimates calibrated scores for unlabeled examples in each group using a hierarchical latent variable model conditioned on labeled examples. This in turn allows for inference of posterior distributions with associated notions of uncertainty for a variety of grou…
University of Southern California（南加利福尼亚大学）；Harvard University（哈佛大学）；University of California, Santa Cruz（加利福尼亚大学圣克鲁兹分校）
What is the best way to define algorithmic fairness? While many definitions of fairness have been proposed in the computer science literature, there is no clear agreement over a particular definition. In this work, we investigate ordinary people's perceptions of three of these fairness definitions. Across two online experiments, we test which definitions people perceive to be the fairest in the context of loan decisions, and whether fairness perceptions change with the addition of sensitive information (i.e., race of the loan applicants). Overall, one definition (calibrated fairness) tends to …
Fairness is a principal social value that can be observed in civilisations around the world. A manifestation of this is in social agreements, often described in texts, such as contracts. Yet, despite the prevalence of such, a fairness metric for texts describing a social act remains wanting. To address this, we take a step back to consider the problem based on first principals. Instead of using rules or templates, we utilise social psychology literature to determine the principal factors that humans use when making a fairness assessment. We then attempt to digitise these using word embeddings …
Fairness has been taken as a critical metric in machine learning models, which is considered as an important component of trustworthy machine learning. In this paper, we focus on obtaining fairness for popular link prediction tasks, which are measured by dyadic fairness. A novel pre-processing methodology is proposed to establish dyadic fairness through data repairing based on optimal transport theory. With the well-established theoretical connection between the dyadic fairness for graph link prediction and a conditional distribution alignment problem, the dyadic repairing scheme can be equiva…
A Blockchain-Monitored Agentic AI Architecture for Trusted Perception-Reasoning-Action Pipelines
Faculty of Computer Studies, Arab Open University-Bahrain（巴林阿拉伯开放大学计算机科学学院）；Faculty of Computer and Information System, Islamic University of Madinah, Saudi Arabia（沙特阿拉伯麦地那伊斯兰大学计算机与信息系统学院）
University of South Carolina（南卡罗来纳大学）；Embible, Inc.（Embible公司）
AI systems have seen significant adoption in various domains. At the same time, further adoption in some domains is hindered by inability to fully trust an AI system that it will not harm a human. Besides the concerns for fairness, privacy, transparency, and explainability are key to developing trusts in AI systems. As stated in describing trustworthy AI "Trust comes through understanding. How AI-led decisions are made and what determining factors were included are crucial to understand." The subarea of explaining AI systems has come to be known as XAI. Multiple aspects of an AI system can be …
Telecommunication Engineering Centre（电信工程中心）；Ministry of Communications（通信部）；Adobe Inc.（奥多比公司）；Manipal Institute of Technology（马尼帕尔理工学院）
Decisions made by various Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems greatly influence our day-to-day lives. With the increasing use of AI systems, it becomes crucial to know that they are fair, identify the underlying biases in their decision-making, and create a standardized framework to ascertain their fairness. In this paper, we propose a novel Fairness Score to measure the fairness of a data-driven AI system and a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for issuing Fairness Certification for such systems. Fairness Score and audit process standardization will ensure quality, reduce ambiguity, enable …
