Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper extends a bias mitigation framework to address the dual challenges of quantifying intersectional bias and ensuring adequate representation of intersectional subgroups in training data. By formulating bias mitigation as an integer linear program, the authors optimize for data efficiency while satisfying coverage constraints, allowing for small approximation errors in bias reduction. The results show that their approach not only maintains predictive accuracy across classifiers but also highlights the trade-offs between bias reduction and data modification costs, crucial for compliance and governance.
Achieving fairness in machine learning may come at a lower data cost than previously thought, as this framework balances bias mitigation with representation needs.
Machine learning models have been shown to exhibit discriminatory outcomes or degraded performance for individuals at the intersection of multiple sensitive attributes, such as race and gender. This stems in part from two interrelated challenges: the lack of principled measures for quantifying bias (potentially intersectional), and insufficient representation of intersectional subgroups in training data. We extend a recent bias mitigation framework to incorporate coverage constraints that enforce sufficient representation across groups, including intersectional subgroups. Since achieving exactly zero bias for all groups may not be data efficient (meaning it may require large amounts of data), our solution trades small approximation errors in bias for greater data efficiency while satisfying coverage constraints. We also formulate bias mitigation as an integer linear program that optimizes over all mitigation strategies, and characterize the price of fairness, the minimum data modification cost, as a function of fairness tolerance. This is essential both for legal compliance, where regulations may mandate specific fairness thresholds, and for data governance, enabling practitioners to make informed trade-offs between bias reduction and data modification (particularly, data purchasing) costs. We evaluate our techniques on publicly available datasets, demonstrating that bias mitigation via our framework preserves predictive accuracy across multiple classifiers, and that coverage constraints, while motivated by statistical considerations, are essential for preserving downstream ML performance.
