Reranking individuals: the effect of fair classification within-groups

Artificial Intelligence (AI) finds widespread application across various domains, but it sparks concerns about fairness in its deployment. The prevailing discourse in classification often emphasizes outcome-based metrics comparing sensitive subgroups without consideration of the differential impacts within subgroups. Bias mitigation techniques do not only affect the ranking of pairs of instances across sensitive groups, but often also significantly affect the ranking of instances within these groups. Such changes are hard to explain and raise concerns regarding the validity of the intervention. Unfortunately, these effects remain under the radar in the accuracy-fairness evaluation framework that is usually applied. In this paper, we illustrate the effect of several popular bias mitigation methods, and how their output often does not reflect real-world scenarios.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACM Journal on Responsible Computing
Published
2026-04-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3802540
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reranking individuals: the effect of fair classification within-groups

Marco Favier, Sofie Goethals, Toon Calders
ACM Journal on Responsible Computing
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Reranking individuals: the effect of fair classification within-groups

Marco Favier, Sofie Goethals, Toon Calders
article en

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) finds widespread application across various domains, but it sparks concerns about fairness in its deployment. The prevailing discourse in classification often emphasizes outcome-based metrics comparing sensitive subgroups without consideration of the differential impacts within subgroups. Bias mitigation techniques do not only affect the ranking of pairs of instances across sensitive groups, but often also significantly affect the ranking of instances within these groups. Such changes are hard to explain and raise concerns regarding the validity of the intervention. Unfortunately, these effects remain under the radar in the accuracy-fairness evaluation framework that is usually applied. In this paper, we illustrate the effect of several popular bias mitigation methods, and how their output often does not reflect real-world scenarios.

ACM Journal on Responsible Computing
University of Antwerp (BE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
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.