Fairness through Difference Awareness: Measuring Desired Group Discrimination in LLMs

Algorithmic fairness has conventionally adopted the mathematically convenient perspective of racial color-blindness (i.e., difference unaware treatment).However, we contend that in a range of important settings, group difference awareness matters.For example, differentiating between groups may be necessary in legal contexts (e.g., the U.S. compulsory draft applies to men but not women) and harm assessments (e.g., referring to girls as "terrorists" may be less harmful than referring to Muslim people as such).Thus, in contrast to most fairness work, we study fairness through the perspective of treating people differently -when it is contextually appropriate to.We first introduce an important distinction between descriptive (fact-based), normative (value-based), and correlation (association-based) benchmarks.This distinction is significant because each category requires separate interpretation and mitigation tailored to its specific characteristics.Then, we present a benchmark suite composed of eight different scenarios for a total of 16k questions that enables us to assess difference awareness.Finally, we show results across ten models that demonstrate difference awareness is a distinct dimension to fairness where existing bias mitigation strategies may backfire.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.341
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Business Law and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.91

Funders

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

Fairness through Difference Awareness: Measuring Desired Group Discrimination in LLMs

Anni Wang, Daniel E. Ho, Michelle Phan, Sanmi Koyejo
1 citations
Business Law and Ethics
3.91
article

Fairness through Difference Awareness: Measuring Desired Group Discrimination in LLMs

Anni Wang, Daniel E. Ho, Michelle Phan, Sanmi Koyejo
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Algorithmic fairness has conventionally adopted the mathematically convenient perspective of racial color-blindness (i.e., difference unaware treatment).However, we contend that in a range of important settings, group difference awareness matters.For example, differentiating between groups may be necessary in legal contexts (e.g., the U.S. compulsory draft applies to men but not women) and harm assessments (e.g., referring to girls as "terrorists" may be less harmful than referring to Muslim people as such).Thus, in contrast to most fairness work, we study fairness through the perspective of treating people differently -when it is contextually appropriate to.We first introduce an important distinction between descriptive (fact-based), normative (value-based), and correlation (association-based) benchmarks.This distinction is significant because each category requires separate interpretation and mitigation tailored to its specific characteristics.Then, we present a benchmark suite composed of eight different scenarios for a total of 16k questions that enables us to assess difference awareness.Finally, we show results across ten models that demonstrate difference awareness is a distinct dimension to fairness where existing bias mitigation strategies may backfire.

Cornell University (US), Stanford University (US)
National Science Foundation, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Advanced Research Projects Agency
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Business Law and Ethics
3.91
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.

Fairness through Difference Awareness: Measuring Desired Group Discrimination in LLMs — Anni Wang, Daniel E. Ho, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS