Blossom Metevier’s research while affiliated with University of Massachusetts Amherst and other places

Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly being used to aid decision-making in high-risk applications. However, these models can perpetuate biases present in their training data or the systems in which they are integrated. When unaddressed, these biases can lead to harmful outcomes, such as misdiagnoses in healthcare [11], wrongful denials of loan applications [9], and over-policing of minority communities [2, 4]. Consequently, the fair ML community is dedicated to developing algorithms that minimize the influence of data and model bias.

We propose a test of fairness in score-based ranking systems called matched pair calibration. Our approach constructs a set of matched item pairs with minimal confounding differences between subgroups before computing an appropriate measure of ranking error over the set. The matching step ensures that we compare subgroup outcomes between identically scored items so that measured performance differences directly imply unfairness in subgroup-level exposures. We show how our approach generalizes the fairness intuitions of calibration from a binary classification setting to ranking and connect our approach to other proposals for ranking fairness measures. Moreover, our strategy shows how the logic of marginal outcome tests extends to cases where the analyst has access to model scores. Lastly, we provide an example of applying matched pair calibration to a real-word ranking data set to demonstrate its efficacy in detecting ranking bias.

Recent research has shown that seemingly fair machine learning models, when used to inform decisions that have an impact on peoples' lives or well-being (e.g., applications involving education, employment, and lending), can inadvertently increase social inequality in the long term. This is because prior fairness-aware algorithms only consider static fairness constraints, such as equal opportunity or demographic parity. However, enforcing constraints of this type may result in models that have negative long-term impact on disadvantaged individuals and communities. We introduce ELF (Enforcing Long-term Fairness), the first classification algorithm that provides high-confidence fairness guarantees in terms of long-term, or delayed, impact. We prove that the probability that ELF returns an unfair solution is less than a user-specified tolerance and that (under mild assumptions), given sufficient training data, ELF is able to find and return a fair solution if one exists. We show experimentally that our algorithm can successfully mitigate long-term unfairness.

The Markov decision process (MDP) formulation used to model many real-world sequential decision making problems does not efficiently capture the setting where the set of available decisions (actions) at each time step is stochastic. Recently, the stochastic action set Markov decision process (SAS-MDP) formulation has been proposed, which better captures the concept of a stochastic action set. In this paper we argue that existing RL algorithms for SAS-MDPs can suffer from potential divergence issues, and present new policy gradient algorithms for SAS-MDPs that incorporate variance reduction techniques unique to this setting, and provide conditions for their convergence. We conclude with experiments that demonstrate the practicality of our approaches on tasks inspired by real-life use cases wherein the action set is stochastic.

The Markov decision process (MDP) formulation used to model many real-world sequential decision making problems does not capture the setting where the set of available decisions (actions) at each time step is stochastic. Recently, the stochastic action set Markov decision process (SAS-MDP) formulation has been proposed, which captures the concept of a stochastic action set. In this paper we argue that existing RL algorithms for SAS-MDPs suffer from divergence issues, and present new algorithms for SAS-MDPs that incorporate variance reduction techniques unique to this setting, and provide conditions for their convergence. We conclude with experiments that demonstrate the practicality of our approaches using several tasks inspired by real-life use cases wherein the action set is stochastic.

Lexicase selection is a selection method that was developed for parent selection in genetic programming. In this chapter, we present a study of lexicase selection in a non-genetic-programming context, conducted to investigate the broader applicability of the technique. Specifically, we present a framework for solving Boolean constraint satisfaction problems using a traditional genetic algorithm, with linear genomes of fixed length. We present results of experiments in this framework using three parent selection algorithms: lexicase selection, tournament selection (with several tournament sizes), and fitness-proportionate selection. The results show that when lexicase selection is used, more solutions are found, fewer generations are required to find those solutions, and more diverse populations are maintained. We discuss the implications of these results for the utility of lexicase selection more generally.