
TL;DR
This paper critically examines the ethical foundations of fairness in machine learning through a consequentialist lens, highlighting tradeoffs, limitations, and implications for automated decision-making systems.
Contribution
It offers a consequentialist critique of existing fairness definitions and discusses the ethical considerations of learning and randomization in machine learning.
Findings
Highlights tradeoffs in fairness definitions
Critiques current approaches from a consequentialist perspective
Discusses implications of learning and randomization for ethics
Abstract
Recent work on fairness in machine learning has primarily emphasized how to define, quantify, and encourage "fair" outcomes. Less attention has been paid, however, to the ethical foundations which underlie such efforts. Among the ethical perspectives that should be taken into consideration is consequentialism, the position that, roughly speaking, outcomes are all that matter. Although consequentialism is not free from difficulties, and although it does not necessarily provide a tractable way of choosing actions (because of the combined problems of uncertainty, subjectivity, and aggregation), it nevertheless provides a powerful foundation from which to critique the existing literature on machine learning fairness. Moreover, it brings to the fore some of the tradeoffs involved, including the problem of who counts, the pros and cons of using a policy, and the relative value of the distant…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
