Balancing Efficiency with Equality: Auction Design with Group Fairness Concerns

The issue of fairness in AI arises from discriminatory practices in applications like job recommendations and risk assessments, emphasising the need for algorithms that do not discriminate based on group characteristics. This concern is also pertinent to auctions, commonly used for resource allocation, which necessitate fairness considerations. Our study examines auctions with groups distinguished by specific attributes, seeking to (1) define a fairness notion that ensures equitable treatment for all, (2) identify mechanisms that adhere to this fairness while preserving incentive compatibility, and (3) explore the balance between fairness and seller's revenue. We introduce two fairness notions-group fairness and individual fairness-and propose two corresponding auction mechanisms: the Group Probability Mechanism, which meets group fairness and incentive criteria, and the Group Score Mechanism, which also encompasses individual fairness. Through experiments, we validate these mechanisms' effectiveness in promoting fairness and examine their implications for seller revenue.

Publication Details

Journal
arXiv (Cornell University)
Published
2024-08-08
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Balancing Efficiency with Equality: Auction Design with Group Fairness Concerns

arXiv (Cornell University)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Balancing Efficiency with Equality: Auction Design with Group Fairness Concerns

article en

Abstract

The issue of fairness in AI arises from discriminatory practices in applications like job recommendations and risk assessments, emphasising the need for algorithms that do not discriminate based on group characteristics. This concern is also pertinent to auctions, commonly used for resource allocation, which necessitate fairness considerations. Our study examines auctions with groups distinguished by specific attributes, seeking to (1) define a fairness notion that ensures equitable treatment for all, (2) identify mechanisms that adhere to this fairness while preserving incentive compatibility, and (3) explore the balance between fairness and seller's revenue. We introduce two fairness notions-group fairness and individual fairness-and propose two corresponding auction mechanisms: the Group Probability Mechanism, which meets group fairness and incentive criteria, and the Group Score Mechanism, which also encompasses individual fairness. Through experiments, we validate these mechanisms' effectiveness in promoting fairness and examine their implications for seller revenue.

arXiv (Cornell University)
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 44%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.