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

Practical Bias Mitigation through Proxy Sensitive Attribute Label Generation (2312.15994v1)

Published 26 Dec 2023 in cs.LG and cs.CY

Abstract: Addressing bias in the trained machine learning system often requires access to sensitive attributes. In practice, these attributes are not available either due to legal and policy regulations or data unavailability for a given demographic. Existing bias mitigation algorithms are limited in their applicability to real-world scenarios as they require access to sensitive attributes to achieve fairness. In this research work, we aim to address this bottleneck through our proposed unsupervised proxy-sensitive attribute label generation technique. Towards this end, we propose a two-stage approach of unsupervised embedding generation followed by clustering to obtain proxy-sensitive labels. The efficacy of our work relies on the assumption that bias propagates through non-sensitive attributes that are correlated to the sensitive attributes and, when mapped to the high dimensional latent space, produces clusters of different demographic groups that exist in the data. Experimental results demonstrate that bias mitigation using existing algorithms such as Fair Mixup and Adversarial Debiasing yields comparable results on derived proxy labels when compared against using true sensitive attributes.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (34)
  1. Machine bias: There’s software used across the country to predict future criminals. And it’s biased against blacks. ProPublica, 23: 77–91.
  2. Deep Learning and Medical Diagnosis: A Review of Literature. Multimodal Technol. Interact., 2(3): 47.
  3. AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Bias. CoRR, abs/1810.01943.
  4. Data Decisions and Theoretical Implications when Adversarially Learning Fair Representations. CoRR, abs/1707.00075.
  5. Optimized Pre-Processing for Discrimination Prevention. In Guyon, I.; von Luxburg, U.; Bengio, S.; Wallach, H. M.; Fergus, R.; Vishwanathan, S. V. N.; and Garnett, R., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, December 4-9, 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA, 3992–4001.
  6. From Soft Classifiers to Hard Decisions: How fair can we be? In danah boyd; and Morgenstern, J. H., eds., Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* 2019, Atlanta, GA, USA, January 29-31, 2019, 309–318. ACM.
  7. Fair Mixup: Fairness via Interpolation. In 9th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2021, Virtual Event, Austria, May 3-7, 2021. Austria: OpenReview.net.
  8. Fair Transfer Learning with Missing Protected Attributes. In Conitzer, V.; Hadfield, G. K.; and Vallor, S., eds., Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, AIES 2019, Honolulu, HI, USA, January 27-28, 2019, 91–98. ACM.
  9. Statistical and machine learning models in credit scoring: A systematic literature survey. Appl. Soft Comput., 91: 106263.
  10. Fairness via Representation Neutralization. In Ranzato, M.; Beygelzimer, A.; Dauphin, Y. N.; Liang, P.; and Vaughan, J. W., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2021, NeurIPS 2021, December 6-14, 2021, virtual, 12091–12103. Virtual: NeurIPS.
  11. Fairness via Representation Neutralization. In Ranzato, M.; Beygelzimer, A.; Dauphin, Y. N.; Liang, P.; and Vaughan, J. W., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2021, NeurIPS 2021, December 6-14, 2021, virtual, 12091–12103.
  12. Data Pre-Processing for Discrimination Prevention: Information-Theoretic Optimization and Analysis. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process., 12(5): 1106–1119.
  13. Fairness through awareness. In Goldwasser, S., ed., Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science 2012, Cambridge, MA, USA, January 8-10, 2012, 214–226. ACM.
  14. Certifying and Removing Disparate Impact. In Cao, L.; Zhang, C.; Joachims, T.; Webb, G. I.; Margineantu, D. D.; and Williams, G., eds., Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Sydney, NSW, Australia, August 10-13, 2015, 259–268. ACM.
  15. Potential biases in machine learning algorithms using electronic health record data. JAMA internal medicine, 178(11): 1544–1547.
  16. Fairness without the Sensitive Attribute via Causal Variational Autoencoder. In Raedt, L. D., ed., Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2022, Vienna, Austria, 23-29 July 2022, 696–702. Austria: ijcai.org.
  17. Transitioning from Real to Synthetic data: Quantifying the bias in model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.04144.
  18. Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning. In Lee, D. D.; Sugiyama, M.; von Luxburg, U.; Guyon, I.; and Garnett, R., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 29: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2016, December 5-10, 2016, Barcelona, Spain, 3315–3323.
  19. Data preprocessing techniques for classification without discrimination. Knowl. Inf. Syst., 33(1): 1–33.
  20. Decision Theory for Discrimination-Aware Classification. In Zaki, M. J.; Siebes, A.; Yu, J. X.; Goethals, B.; Webb, G. I.; and Wu, X., eds., 12th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, ICDM 2012, Brussels, Belgium, December 10-13, 2012, 924–929. IEEE Computer Society.
  21. Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted Learning. In Larochelle, H.; Ranzato, M.; Hadsell, R.; Balcan, M.; and Lin, H., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2020, NeurIPS 2020, December 6-12, 2020, virtual.
  22. A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning.
  23. A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning. ACM Comput. Surv., 54(6): 115:1–115:35.
  24. On Fairness and Calibration. In Guyon, I.; von Luxburg, U.; Bengio, S.; Wallach, H. M.; Fergus, R.; Vishwanathan, S. V. N.; and Garnett, R., eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, December 4-9, 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA, 5680–5689.
  25. Fairness GAN: Generating datasets with fairness properties using a generative adversarial network. IBM J. Res. Dev., 63(4/5): 3:1–3:9.
  26. Attention Is All You Need. CoRR, abs/1706.03762.
  27. Toward a demographic understanding of incarceration disparities: Race, ethnicity, and age structure. Journal of quantitative criminology, 32(4): 515–530.
  28. Learning Non-Discriminatory Predictors. In Kale, S.; and Shamir, O., eds., Conference on Learning Theory, volume 65, 1920–1953.
  29. Fair Class Balancing: Enhancing Model Fairness without Observing Sensitive Attributes. In d’Aquin, M.; Dietze, S.; Hauff, C.; Curry, E.; and Cudré-Mauroux, P., eds., CIKM ’20: The 29th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Virtual Event, Ireland, October 19-23, 2020, 1715–1724. ACM.
  30. Ethical Implications of Bias in Machine Learning. In Bui, T., ed., 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2018, Hilton Waikoloa Village, Hawaii, USA, January 3-6, 2018, 1–8. ScholarSpace / AIS Electronic Library (AISeL).
  31. Fairness Constraints: Mechanisms for Fair Classification. In Singh, A.; and Zhu, X. J., eds., Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, AISTATS 2017, 20-22 April 2017, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA, volume 54 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 962–970. PMLR.
  32. Learning Fair Representations. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2013, Atlanta, GA, USA, 16-21 June 2013, volume 28 of JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, 325–333. JMLR.org.
  33. Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learning. In Furman, J.; Marchant, G. E.; Price, H.; and Rossi, F., eds., Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, AIES 2018, New Orleans, LA, USA, February 02-03, 2018, 335–340. USA: ACM.
  34. Towards Fair Classifiers Without Sensitive Attributes: Exploring Biases in Related Features. In Candan, K. S.; Liu, H.; Akoglu, L.; Dong, X. L.; and Tang, J., eds., WSDM ’22: The Fifteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, Virtual Event / Tempe, AZ, USA, February 21 - 25, 2022, 1433–1442. ACM.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Bhushan Chaudhary (1 paper)
  2. Anubha Pandey (6 papers)
  3. Deepak Bhatt (3 papers)
  4. Darshika Tiwari (1 paper)
Citations (2)