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:因此,负责开发这些模型的人必须认真评估其对于不同人群的影响,并有利于群体公平,也就是说,确保由种族或性别等敏感人口属性决定的群体不会受到不公正对待。为实现这一目标,这些人口属性对于评估这些模型影响的人来说具有根本意义。不幸的是,收集和储存这些属性往往与行业惯例和数据最小化和隐私不透明化的立法发生冲突。因此,即使从公司内部开发这些模型,也很难衡量经过培训的模型的团体公平性。在这项工作中,我们通过使用量化技术,处理在敏感属性不知情的情况下衡量群体公平性的问题,监督的学习任务涉及直接提供群体一级的流行率估计数(而不是个人级别的标签 ) 。我们表明,量化方法特别适合解决不公平性的问题,因为它们坚固到无法避免的分布变化。同时,我们可能很难衡量经过培训的模型的团体公平性目标,甚至在公司内部开发这些模型时,在敏感属性方面,我们通过使用量化技术,从先前的准确性的角度,可以证明,从先前的精确性的角度,从先前的精确性的角度,从先前的精确性的角度,可以证明我们所展示的准确性,从先前的精确性的方法,从具有的准确性。