Pith. sign in

REVIEW

On the Interplay between Fairness and Explainability

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 2310.16607 v2 pith:GQ7EJ5PU submitted 2023-10-25 cs.CL

On the Interplay between Fairness and Explainability

classification cs.CL
keywords fairnessmodelsexplainabilityaimsbiasfairmitigationother
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

In order to build reliable and trustworthy NLP applications, models need to be both fair across different demographics and explainable. Usually these two objectives, fairness and explainability, are optimized and/or examined independently of each other. Instead, we argue that forthcoming, trustworthy NLP systems should consider both. In this work, we perform a first study to understand how they influence each other: do fair(er) models rely on more plausible rationales? and vice versa. To this end, we conduct experiments on two English multi-class text classification datasets, BIOS and ECtHR, that provide information on gender and nationality, respectively, as well as human-annotated rationales. We fine-tune pre-trained language models with several methods for (i) bias mitigation, which aims to improve fairness; (ii) rationale extraction, which aims to produce plausible explanations. We find that bias mitigation algorithms do not always lead to fairer models. Moreover, we discover that empirical fairness and explainability are orthogonal.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.