Pushing the limits of fairness in algorithmic decision-making
AUTHOR: 
Nisarg ShahAuthors Info & Claims
Article No.: 806, Pages 7051 - 7056
Abstract
Designing provably fair decision-making algorithms is a task of growing interest and importance. In this article, I argue that preference-based notions of fairness proposed decades ago in the economics literature and subsequently explored indepth within computer science (specifically, within the field of computational social choice) are aptly suited for a wide range of modern decision-making systems, from conference peer review to recommender systems to participatory budgeting.
References
[1]
Hannaneh Akrami, Noga Alon, Bhaskar Ray Chaudhury, Jugal Garg, Kurt Mehlhorn, and Ruta Mehta. EFX: A simpler approach and an (almost) optimal guarantee via rainbow cycle number. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), 2023. Forthcoming.
[2]
Georgios Amanatidis, Georgios Birmpas, Aris Filos-Ratsikas, Alexandros Hollender, and Alexandros A Voudouris. Maximum Nash welfare and other stories about EFX. Theoretical Computer Science, 863:69-85, 2021.
[3]
Georgios Amanatidis, Haris Aziz, Georgios Birmpas, Aris Filos-Ratsikas, Bo Li, Hervé Moulin, Alexandros A Voudouris, and Xiaowei Wu. Fair division of indivisible goods: A survey. arXiv:2208.08782, 2022.
[4]
David Arnold, Will Dobbie, and Crystal S Yang. Racial bias in bail decisions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4):1885-1932, 2018.
[5]
Haris Aziz and Nisarg Shah. Participatory budgeting: Models and approaches. In Tamás Rudas and Gábor Péli, editors, Pathways Between Social Science and Computational Social Science: Theories, Methods, and Interpretations, pages 215-236. Springer, 2021.
[6]
Haris Aziz, Evi Micha, and Nisarg Shah. Group fairness in peer review. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), 2023. Forthcoming.
[7]
Maria-Florina Balcan, Travis Dick, Ritesh Noothigattu, and Ariel D Procaccia. Envy-free classification. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pages 1238-1248, 2019.
[8]
Siddhartha Banerjee, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Safwan Hossain, Billy Jin, Evi Micha, and Nisarg Shah. Proportionally fair online allocation of public goods with predictions. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), 2023. Forthcoming.
[9]
Siddharth Barman, Umang Bhaskar, and Nisarg Shah. Optimal bounds on the price of fairness for indivisible goods. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Web and Internet Economics (WINE), pages 356- 369, 2020.
[10]
Gerdus Benade, Ariel D Procaccia, and Jamie Tucker-Foltz. You can have your cake and redistrict it too. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), 2023. Forthcoming.
[11]
Marcus Berliant, William Thomson, and Karl Dunz. On the fair division of a heterogeneous commodity. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 21(3):201-216, 1992.
[12]
Allan Borodin, Omer Lev, Nisarg Shah, and Tyrone Strangway. Big city vs. the great outdoors: Voter distribution and how it affects gerrymandering. In Proceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 98-104, 2018.
[13]
Allan Borodin, Omer Lev, Nisarg Shah, and Tyrone Strangway. Little house (seat) on the prairie: Compactness, gerrymandering, and population distribution. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pages 154-162, 2022.
[14]
Ioannis Caragiannis, David Kurokawa, Hervé Moulin, Ariel D. Procaccia, Nisarg Shah, and Junxing Wang. The unreasonable fairness of maximum Nash welfare. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation, 7(3): Article 12, 2019.
[15]
Ioannis Caragiannis, Evi Micha, and Nisarg Shah. A little charity guarantees fair connected graph partitioning. In Proceedings of the 36th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 4908- 4916, 2022.
[16]
Bhaskar Ray Chaudhury, Jugal Garg, and Kurt Mehlhorn. EFX exists for three agents. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), pages 1-19, 2020.
[17]
Xingyu Chen, Brandon Fain, Liang Lyu, and Kamesh Munagala. Proportionally fair clustering. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), pages 1032-1041, 2019.
[18]
Vincent Conitzer, Rupert Freeman, and Nisarg Shah. Fair public decision making. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), pages 629-646, 2017.
[19]
Vincent Conitzer, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Jana Schaich Borg, Yuan Deng, and Max Kramer. Moral decision making frameworks for artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 31st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 4831-4835, 2017.
[20]
Vincent Conitzer, Rupert Freeman, Nisarg Shah, and Jennifer Wortman Vaughan. Group fairness for the allocation of indivisible goods. In Proceedings of the 33rd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 1853-1860, 2019.
[21]
A. Philip Dawid. The well-calibrated Bayesian. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 77(379):605-610, 1982.
[22]
Soroush Ebadian, Anson Kahng, Dominik Peters, and Nisarg Shah. Optimized distortion and proportional fairness in voting. In Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), pages 563-600, 2022.
[23]
Soroush Ebadian, Dominik Peters, and Nisarg Shah. How to fairly allocate easy and difficult chores. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pages 372-380, 2022.
[24]
Brandon Fain, Kamesh Munagala, and Nisarg Shah. Fair allocation of indivisible public goods. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), pages 575-592, 2018.
[25]
Duncan Karl Foley. Resource allocation and the public sector. Yale Economics Essays, 7:45-98, 1967.
[26]
Rupert Freeman, Nisarg Shah, and Rohit Vaish. Best of both worlds: Ex-ante and ex-post fairness in resource allocation. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), pages 21-22, 2020.
[27]
Rupert Freeman, Evi Micha, and Nisarg Shah. Two-sided matching meets fair division. In Proceedings of the 30th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 203-209, 2021.
[28]
Ya'akov Gal, Moshe Mash, Ariel D Procaccia, and Yair Zick. Which is the fairest (rent division) of them all? Journal of the ACM, 64(6): article 39, 2017.
[29]
George Gamow and Marvin Stern. Puzzle-Math. Viking, 1958.
[30]
Donald Bruce Gillies. Some theorems on nperson games. Princeton University, 1953.
[31]
Moritz Hardt, Eric Price, and Nati Srebro. Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pages 3315- 3323, 2016.
[32]
Ursula Hébert-Johnson, Michael Kim, Omer Reingold, and Guy Rothblum. Multicalibration: Calibration for the (computationally-identifiable) masses. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), pages 1939-1948, 2018.
[33]
Safwan Hossain, Andjela Mladenovic, and Nisarg Shah. Designing fairly fair classifiers via economic fairness notions. In Proceedings of the International World Wide Web Conference (TheWebConf), pages 1559-1569, 2020.
[34]
Safwan Hossain, Evi Micha, and Nisarg Shah. Fair algorithms for multi-agent multiarmed bandits. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pages 24005-24017, 2021.
[35]
Hadi Hosseini, Zhiyi Huang, Ayumi Igarashi, and Nisarg Shah. Class fairness in online matching. In Proceedings of the 37th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2023. Forthcoming.
[36]
Ian Kash, Ariel D Procaccia, and Nisarg Shah. No agent left behind: Dynamic fair division of multiple resources. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 51:579-603, 2014.
[37]
Michael Kearns, Seth Neel, Aaron Roth, and Zhiwei Steven Wu. Preventing fairness gerry-mandering: Auditing and learning for subgroup fairness. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), pages 2564-2572, 2018.
[38]
Frank Kelly. Charging and rate control for elastic traffic. European Transactions on Telecommunications, 8:33-37, 1997.
[39]
David Kurokawa, Ariel D. Procaccia, and Nisarg Shah. Leximin allocations in the real world. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation, 6(3-4): Article 11, 2018.
[40]
Min Kyung Lee, Daniel Kusbit, Anson Kahng, Ji Tae Kim, Xinran Yuan, Allissa Chan, Daniel See, Ritesh Noothigattu, Siheon Lee, Alexandros Psomas, and Ariel D Procaccia. WeBuildAI: Participatory framework for fair and efficient algorithmic governance. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), article 181, 2019.
[41]
Lily Li, Evi Micha, Aleksandar Nikolov, and Nisarg Shah. Partitioning friends fairly. In Proceedings of the 37th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2023. Forthcoming.
[42]
Evi Micha and Nisarg Shah. Proportionally fair clustering revisited. In Proceedings of the 47th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), pages 85:1-85:16, 2020.
[43]
Ritesh Noothigattu, Snehalkumar Gaikwad, Edmond Awad, Sohan Dsouza, Iyad Rahwan, Pradeep Ravikumar, and Ariel Procaccia. A voting-based system for ethical decision making. In Proceedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 1587-1594, 2018.
[44]
David C. Parkes, Ariel D. Procaccia, and Nisarg Shah. Beyond Dominant Resource Fairness: Extensions, limitations, and indivisibilities. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation, 3(1): Article 3, 2015.
[45]
Geoff Pleiss, Manish Raghavan, Felix Wu, Jon Kleinberg, and Kilian Q Weinberger. On fairness and calibration. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pages 5680-5689, 2017.
[46]
Ariel D Procaccia. Technical perspective: An answer to fair division's most enigmatic question. Communications of the ACM, 63(4):118-118, 2020.
[47]
Nripsuta Ani Saxena, Karen Huang, Evan DeFilippis, Goran Radanovic, David C Parkes, and Yang Liu. How do fairness definitions fare? Examining public attitudes towards algorithmic definitions of fairness. In Proceedings of the 2nd AAAI/ACM Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, and Society (AIES), pages 99- 106, 2019.
[48]
Hugo Steinhaus. The problem of fair division. Econometrica, 16:101-104, 1948.
[49]
Hal R Varian. Equity, envy and efficiency. Journal of Economic Theory, 9:63-91, 1974.
Index Terms
- Pushing the limits of fairness in algorithmic decision-making
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Decision making process: typology, intelligence, and optimization
Decision making is concerned with evaluating and/or ranking possible alternatives of action. In this paper, we develop a model for the process of decision making. Understanding the decision process can provide insights into how humans make decisions, ...
Sustainable decision making: the role of decision support systems
Sustainable decision making stands for decision making which contributes to the transition to a sustainable society. It raises a number of challenging problems for which existing decision support systems (DSS) may not be equipped. The role of DSS in ...
Beyond distributive fairness in algorithmic decision making: feature selection for procedurally fair learning
AAAI'18/IAAI'18/EAAI'18: Proceedings of the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Thirtieth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference and Eighth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial IntelligenceWith widespread use of machine learning methods in numerous domains involving humans, several studies have raised questions about the potential for unfairness towards certain individuals or groups. A number of recent works have proposed methods to measure ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2023 International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence.
Sponsors
- International Joint Conferences on Artifical Intelligence (IJCAI)
Publisher
Unknown publishers
Publication History
Published: 19 August 2023
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 22 Dec 2024