REVIEW 4 cited by
Causal Fairness Analysis
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Decision-making systems based on AI and machine learning have been used throughout a wide range of real-world scenarios, including healthcare, law enforcement, education, and finance. It is no longer far-fetched to envision a future where autonomous systems will be driving entire business decisions and, more broadly, supporting large-scale decision-making infrastructure to solve society's most challenging problems. Issues of unfairness and discrimination are pervasive when decisions are being made by humans, and remain (or are potentially amplified) when decisions are made using machines with little transparency, accountability, and fairness. In this paper, we introduce a framework for \textit{causal fairness analysis} with the intent of filling in this gap, i.e., understanding, modeling, and possibly solving issues of fairness in decision-making settings. The main insight of our approach will be to link the quantification of the disparities present on the observed data with the underlying, and often unobserved, collection of causal mechanisms that generate the disparity in the first place, challenge we call the Fundamental Problem of Causal Fairness Analysis (FPCFA). In order to solve the FPCFA, we study the problem of decomposing variations and empirical measures of fairness that attribute such variations to structural mechanisms and different units of the population. Our effort culminates in the Fairness Map, which is the first systematic attempt to organize and explain the relationship between different criteria found in the literature. Finally, we study which causal assumptions are minimally needed for performing causal fairness analysis and propose a Fairness Cookbook, which allows data scientists to assess the existence of disparate impact and disparate treatment.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
FairDiffuseVQVAE: Sampling-Time Fairness in Tabular Diffusion via Conditional Refinement of Vector-Quantized Latents
FairDiffuseVQVAE reaches state-of-the-art fairness on the standard tabular benchmark (DPR 0.702, EOR 0.686) by uniform protected-attribute sampling at inference, paying ~15 AUC points of utility.
-
A Reverse Causal Framework to Mitigate Spurious Correlations for Debiasing Scene Graph Generation
RcSGG samples relationship features based on training losses and object-pair diversity to reduce head-tail and foreground-background biases in scene graph generation, achieving state-of-the-art mean recall on four benchmarks.
-
Expert Survey: AI Reliability & Security Research Priorities
Expert ratings place capability forecasting and dangerous-capability evaluations at the top of a 105-area AI reliability and security research priority list.
-
Estimating Probabilities of Causation with Machine Learning Models
On a synthetic causal model, a multilayer perceptron with the Mish activation function predicts the lower and upper bounds of the probability of necessity and sufficiency for subpopulations with limited data, reaching...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.