缺失与混淆下的风险评估与公平性

Amanda Coston
{"title":"缺失与混淆下的风险评估与公平性","authors":"Amanda Coston","doi":"10.1145/3306618.3314310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fairness in machine learning has become a significant area of research as risk assessments and other algorithmic decision-making systems are increasingly used in high-stakes applications such as criminal justice, consumer lending, and child welfare screening decisions. Two significant challenges to achieving fair decision-making systems are 1) access to the protected attribute may be limited and 2) the outcome may be confounded or selectively observed depending on the historical data generating process. To address the former challenge, we propose two methods for overcoming limited access to the protected attribute and empirically evaluate their success on three datasets. To address the later challenge, we develop counterfactual risk assessments that account for the effect of historical interventions on the outcome. We analyze the performance of our counterfactual risk assessments in criminal sentencing decisions in Pennsylvania. We compare our model against observational risk assessments.","PeriodicalId":418125,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk Assessments and Fairness Under Missingness and Confounding\",\"authors\":\"Amanda Coston\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3306618.3314310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Fairness in machine learning has become a significant area of research as risk assessments and other algorithmic decision-making systems are increasingly used in high-stakes applications such as criminal justice, consumer lending, and child welfare screening decisions. Two significant challenges to achieving fair decision-making systems are 1) access to the protected attribute may be limited and 2) the outcome may be confounded or selectively observed depending on the historical data generating process. To address the former challenge, we propose two methods for overcoming limited access to the protected attribute and empirically evaluate their success on three datasets. To address the later challenge, we develop counterfactual risk assessments that account for the effect of historical interventions on the outcome. We analyze the performance of our counterfactual risk assessments in criminal sentencing decisions in Pennsylvania. We compare our model against observational risk assessments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":418125,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314310\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314310","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着风险评估和其他算法决策系统越来越多地用于刑事司法、消费贷款和儿童福利筛选决策等高风险应用,机器学习中的公平性已经成为一个重要的研究领域。实现公平决策系统的两个重大挑战是:1)对受保护属性的访问可能受到限制;2)根据历史数据生成过程,结果可能会混淆或有选择地观察。为了解决前一个挑战,我们提出了两种方法来克服对受保护属性的有限访问,并在三个数据集上对它们的成功进行了经验评估。为了解决后面的挑战,我们开发了反事实风险评估,以解释历史干预对结果的影响。我们分析了我们的反事实风险评估在宾夕法尼亚州刑事判决中的表现。我们将我们的模型与观察性风险评估进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk Assessments and Fairness Under Missingness and Confounding
Fairness in machine learning has become a significant area of research as risk assessments and other algorithmic decision-making systems are increasingly used in high-stakes applications such as criminal justice, consumer lending, and child welfare screening decisions. Two significant challenges to achieving fair decision-making systems are 1) access to the protected attribute may be limited and 2) the outcome may be confounded or selectively observed depending on the historical data generating process. To address the former challenge, we propose two methods for overcoming limited access to the protected attribute and empirically evaluate their success on three datasets. To address the later challenge, we develop counterfactual risk assessments that account for the effect of historical interventions on the outcome. We analyze the performance of our counterfactual risk assessments in criminal sentencing decisions in Pennsylvania. We compare our model against observational risk assessments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信