Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Distribution-Specific Auditing For Subgroup Fairness (2401.16439v2)

Published 27 Jan 2024 in cs.LG, cs.CC, and cs.CY

Abstract: We study the problem of auditing classifiers with the notion of statistical subgroup fairness. Kearns et al. (2018) has shown that the problem of auditing combinatorial subgroups fairness is as hard as agnostic learning. Essentially all work on remedying statistical measures of discrimination against subgroups assumes access to an oracle for this problem, despite the fact that no efficient algorithms are known for it. If we assume the data distribution is Gaussian, or even merely log-concave, then a recent line of work has discovered efficient agnostic learning algorithms for halfspaces. Unfortunately, the reduction of Kearns et al. was formulated in terms of weak, "distribution-free" learning, and thus did not establish a connection for families such as log-concave distributions. In this work, we give positive and negative results on auditing for Gaussian distributions: On the positive side, we present an alternative approach to leverage these advances in agnostic learning and thereby obtain the first polynomial-time approximation scheme (PTAS) for auditing nontrivial combinatorial subgroup fairness: we show how to audit statistical notions of fairness over homogeneous halfspace subgroups when the features are Gaussian. On the negative side, we find that under cryptographic assumptions, no polynomial-time algorithm can guarantee any nontrivial auditing, even under Gaussian feature distributions, for general halfspace subgroups.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (26)
  1. Preventing fairness gerrymandering: Auditing and learning for subgroup fairness. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 2564–2572, 2018.
  2. Fairness through computationally-bounded awareness. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 31, 2018.
  3. Multicalibration: Calibration for the (computationally-identifiable) masses. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 1939–1948. PMLR, 2018.
  4. A reductions approach to fair classification. In International conference on machine learning, pages 60–69. PMLR, 2018.
  5. Scalable spectral clustering with group fairness constraints. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 6613–6629. PMLR, 2023.
  6. Kimberlé Crenshaw. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. In Feminist legal theories, pages 23–51. Routledge, 2013.
  7. David Haussler. Decision theoretic generalizations of the pac model for neural net and other learning applications. Information and computation, 100(1):78–150, 1992.
  8. Toward efficient agnostic learning. Machine Learning, 17:115–141, 1994.
  9. On agnostic learning of parities, monomials, and halfspaces. SIAM Journal on Computing, 39(2):606–645, 2009.
  10. Robert E Schapire. The strength of weak learnability. Machine learning, 5:197–227, 1990.
  11. A hybrid branch-and-bound approach for exact rational mixed-integer programming. Mathematical Programming Computation, 5(3):305–344, 2013.
  12. Metamorphic testing of constraint solvers. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming: 24th International Conference, CP 2018, Lille, France, August 27-31, 2018, Proceedings 24, pages 727–736. Springer, 2018.
  13. Solvercheck: Declarative testing of constraints. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming: 25th International Conference, CP 2019, Stamford, CT, USA, September 30–October 4, 2019, Proceedings 25, pages 565–582. Springer, 2019.
  14. Certified dominance and symmetry breaking for combinatorial optimisation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 77:1539–1589, 2023.
  15. An empirical study of rich subgroup fairness for machine learning. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pages 100–109, 2019.
  16. Multiaccuracy: Black-box post-processing for fairness in classification. In Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pages 247–254, 2019.
  17. Near-optimal cryptographic hardness of agnostically learning halfspaces and relu regression under gaussian marginals. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 7922–7938. PMLR, 2023.
  18. Agnostic proper learning of halfspaces under gaussian marginals. In Conference on Learning Theory, pages 1522–1551. PMLR, 2021.
  19. Testing distributional assumptions of learning algorithms. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 1643–1656, 2023.
  20. A moment-matching approach to testable learning and a new characterization of rademacher complexity. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 1657–1670, 2023.
  21. Agnostically learning halfspaces. SIAM Journal on Computing, 37(6):1777–1805, 2008.
  22. Non-convex sgd learns halfspaces with adversarial label noise. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:18540–18549, 2020.
  23. Learning general halfspaces with adversarial label noise via online gradient descent. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 5118–5141. PMLR, 2022.
  24. Agnostic learning of halfspaces with gradient descent via soft margins. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 3417–3426. PMLR, 2021.
  25. Oded Regev. On lattices, learning with errors, random linear codes, and cryptography. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 56(6):1–40, 2009.
  26. Continuous lwe is as hard as lwe & applications to learning gaussian mixtures. In 2022 IEEE 63rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 1162–1173. IEEE, 2022.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (3)
  1. Daniel Hsu (107 papers)
  2. Jizhou Huang (26 papers)
  3. Brendan Juba (30 papers)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.