Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Statistical Inference for Fairness Auditing

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

arxiv 2305.03712 v2 pith:TIOCKFOQ submitted 2023-05-05 stat.ME cs.CYcs.LG

classification stat.MEcs.CYcs.LG
keywords modelsubpopulationsfairnessperformancegroupsmethodsauditingcertify
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Before deploying a black-box model in high-stakes problems, it is important to evaluate the model's performance on sensitive subpopulations. For example, in a recidivism prediction task, we may wish to identify demographic groups for which our prediction model has unacceptably high false positive rates or certify that no such groups exist. In this paper, we frame this task, often referred to as "fairness auditing," in terms of multiple hypothesis testing. We show how the bootstrap can be used to simultaneously bound performance disparities over a collection of groups with statistical guarantees. Our methods can be used to flag subpopulations affected by model underperformance, and certify subpopulations for which the model performs adequately. Crucially, our audit is model-agnostic and applicable to nearly any performance metric or group fairness criterion. Our methods also accommodate extremely rich -- even infinite -- collections of subpopulations. Further, we generalize beyond subpopulations by showing how to assess performance over certain distribution shifts. We test the proposed methods on benchmark datasets in predictive inference and algorithmic fairness and find that our audits can provide interpretable and trustworthy guarantees.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. From Individual Experience to Collective Evidence: A Reporting-Based Framework for Identifying Systemic Harms

    cs.CY 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A sequential hypothesis test on incident reports can flag subgroups overrepresented relative to their population share, identifying known harms in vaccine and mortgage data early.

Pith tools