Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper introduces Representation Fidelity, a metric to validate algorithmic decisions about humans by comparing the input representation used by the algorithm with a self-description provided by the human subject. They operationalize this by measuring the distance between the two representations and developing a typology of representation mismatches. They also introduce a benchmark dataset, Loan-Granting Self-Representations Corpus 2025, consisting of 30,000 synthetic self-descriptions derived from the German Credit Dataset to evaluate representation fidelity.
Algorithmic decisions about humans can now be audited for "Representation Fidelity" by checking if they align with self-reported descriptions, revealing potential biases and inaccuracies.
This paper introduces a new dimension for validating algorithmic decisions about humans by measuring the fidelity of their representations. Representation Fidelity measures if decisions about a person rest on reasonable grounds. We propose to operationalize this notion by measuring the distance between two representations of the same person: (1) an externally prescribed input representation on which the decision is based, and (2) a self-description provided by the human subject of the decision, used solely to validate the input representation. We examine the nature of discrepancies between these representations, how such discrepancies can be quantified, and derive a generic typology of representation mismatches that determine the degree of representation fidelity. We further present the first benchmark for evaluating representation fidelity based on a dataset of loan-granting decisions. Our Loan-Granting Self-Representations Corpus 2025 consists of a large corpus of 30 000 synthetic natural language self-descriptions derived from corresponding representations of applicants in the German Credit Dataset, along with expert annotations of representation mismatches between each pair of representations.
