Fairness Through Counterfactual Utilities
Jack Blandin, Ian Kash

TL;DR
This paper introduces a unified, counterfactual utility-based fairness framework applicable across all machine learning environments, addressing limitations of existing definitions by focusing on utilities and counterfactual outcomes.
Contribution
It provides a generalized set of fairness definitions that extend beyond classification to all ML settings, unifying previous interpretations and resolving known fairness issues.
Findings
Framework unifies fairness definitions across ML environments
Counterfactual utility approach prevents fairness loopholes
Many existing fairness notions are special cases of this framework
Abstract
Group fairness definitions such as Demographic Parity and Equal Opportunity make assumptions about the underlying decision-problem that restrict them to classification problems. Prior work has translated these definitions to other machine learning environments, such as unsupervised learning and reinforcement learning, by implementing their closest mathematical equivalent. As a result, there are numerous bespoke interpretations of these definitions. Instead, we provide a generalized set of group fairness definitions that unambiguously extend to all machine learning environments while still retaining their original fairness notions. We derive two fairness principles that enable such a generalized framework. First, our framework measures outcomes in terms of utilities, rather than predictions, and does so for both the decision-algorithm and the individual. Second, our framework considers…
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.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsEthics and Social Impacts of AI · Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
