Pith. sign in

REVIEW

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 2106.14574 v1 pith:ONEUAWTA submitted 2021-06-28 cs.CL

Quantifying Social Biases in NLP: A Generalization and Empirical Comparison of Extrinsic Fairness Metrics

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

Measuring bias is key for better understanding and addressing unfairness in NLP/ML models. This is often done via fairness metrics which quantify the differences in a model's behaviour across a range of demographic groups. In this work, we shed more light on the differences and similarities between the fairness metrics used in NLP. First, we unify a broad range of existing metrics under three generalized fairness metrics, revealing the connections between them. Next, we carry out an extensive empirical comparison of existing metrics and demonstrate that the observed differences in bias measurement can be systematically explained via differences in parameter choices for our generalized metrics.

discussion (0)

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