Uncertainty as a Fairness Measure

Unfair predictions of machine learning (ML) models impede their broad acceptance in real-world settings. Tackling this arduous challenge first necessitates defining what it means for an ML model to be fair. This has been addressed by the ML community with various measures of fairness that depend on the prediction outcomes of the ML models, either at the group-level or the individual-level. These fairness measures are limited in that they utilize point predictions, neglecting their variances, or uncertainties, making them susceptible to noise, missingness and shifts in data. In this paper, we first show that a ML model may appear to be fair with existing point-based fairness measures but biased against a demographic group in terms of prediction uncertainties. Then, we introduce new fairness measures based on different types of uncertainties, namely, aleatoric uncertainty and epistemic uncertainty. We demonstrate on many datasets that (i) our uncertaintybased measures are complementary to existing measures of fairness, and (ii) they provide more insights about the underlying issues leading to bias.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Published
2024-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.16041
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
16.87

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Uncertainty as a Fairness Measure

Selim Kuzucu, Sinan Kalkan, Jiaee Cheong, Hatice Güneş
4 citations
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
16.87
article

Uncertainty as a Fairness Measure

Selim Kuzucu, Sinan Kalkan, Jiaee Cheong, Hatice Güneş
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Unfair predictions of machine learning (ML) models impede their broad acceptance in real-world settings. Tackling this arduous challenge first necessitates defining what it means for an ML model to be fair. This has been addressed by the ML community with various measures of fairness that depend on the prediction outcomes of the ML models, either at the group-level or the individual-level. These fairness measures are limited in that they utilize point predictions, neglecting their variances, or uncertainties, making them susceptible to noise, missingness and shifts in data. In this paper, we first show that a ML model may appear to be fair with existing point-based fairness measures but biased against a demographic group in terms of prediction uncertainties. Then, we introduce new fairness measures based on different types of uncertainties, namely, aleatoric uncertainty and epistemic uncertainty. We demonstrate on many datasets that (i) our uncertaintybased measures are complementary to existing measures of fairness, and (ii) they provide more insights about the underlying issues leading to bias.

Journal of Artificial Intelligence ResearchVol. 81
University of Cambridge (GB), Bridge University (SS)
UK Research and Innovation, Leverhulme Trust, Cambridge Trust, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
16.87
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Uncertainty as a Fairness Measure — Selim Kuzucu, Sinan Kalkan, et al. · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS