Algorithms and models are increasingly deployed to inform decisions about people, inevitably affecting their lives. As a consequence, those in charge of developing these models must carefully evaluate their impact on different groups of people and favour group fairness, that is, ensure that groups determined by sensitive demographic attributes, such as race or sex, are not treated unjustly. To achieve this goal, the availability (awareness) of these demographic attributes to those evaluating the impact of these models is fundamental. Unfortunately, collecting and storing these attributes is often in conflict with industry practices and legislation on data minimisation and privacy. For this reason, it can be hard to measure the group fairness of trained models, even from within the companies developing them. In this work, we tackle the problem of measuring group fairness under unawareness of sensitive attributes, by using techniques from quantification, a supervised learning task concerned with directly providing group-level prevalence estimates (rather than individual-level class labels). We show that quantification approaches are particularly suited to tackle the fairness-under-unawareness problem, as they are robust to inevitable distribution shifts while at the same time decoupling the (desirable) objective of measuring group fairness from the (undesirable) side effect of allowing the inference of sensitive attributes of individuals. More in detail, we show that fairness under unawareness can be cast as a quantification problem and solved with proven methods from the quantification literature. We show that these methods outperform previous approaches to measure demographic parity in five experimental protocols, corresponding to important challenges that complicate the estimation of classifier fairness under unawareness.
翻译:算法和模型越来越多地用来为人们做出决策,从而不可避免地影响着他们的生活。因此,负责开发这些模型的人必须仔细评估它们对不同群体的影响,并倾向于群体公正,即确保由敏感人口属性(例如种族或性别)确定的群体不受不公正的对待。为实现这一目标,对于那些评估这些模型影响的人来说,这些人口属性的可用性(意识)是至关重要的。不幸的是,收集和存储这些属性通常与数据最小化和隐私方面的行业实践和法规相冲突。因此,即使是开发这些模型的公司,也很难衡量训练模型的群体公正性。在这项工作中,我们通过使用量化技术来解决敏感属性未知情况下的群体公正性度量问题,该技术是一项监督学习任务,关注直接提供群组水平的普及率估计值(而不是个体级别的类标签)。我们显示出,量化方法特别适合处理公正性-未知性问题,因为它们对不可避免的分布变化具有鲁棒性,同时将(可取)衡量群体公正性的目标与(不可取)允许推断个体敏感属性的副作用分开。更详细地说,我们表明,公正性-未知性问题可以被视为量化问题,并使用量化文献中的已证明方法解决。我们展示这些方法在五个实验协议中都优于以前的评估分类器公平性的方法,这些实验协议对于在敏感属性未知情况下估计分类器公平性的挑战至关重要。