Fair Correlation Clustering in Forests

TL;DR

This paper explores the computational complexity of Fair Correlation Clustering on forests, revealing conditions under which the problem is tractable or intractable, and emphasizing that fairness constraints, not strictness, drive complexity.

Contribution

It characterizes the distributions of sensitive attributes on forests where Fair Correlation Clustering is solvable efficiently, and shows the problem's complexity is influenced more by fairness constraints than strictness.

Findings

Fair Correlation Clustering is tractable on certain forest classes.

Hardness is influenced more by fairness constraints than strictness.

The problem's complexity varies with sensitive attribute distributions.

Abstract

The study of algorithmic fairness received growing attention recently. This stems from the awareness that bias in the input data for machine learning systems may result in discriminatory outputs. For clustering tasks, one of the most central notions of fairness is the formalization by Chierichetti, Kumar, Lattanzi, and Vassilvitskii [NeurIPS 2017]. A clustering is said to be fair, if each cluster has the same distribution of manifestations of a sensitive attribute as the whole input set. This is motivated by various applications where the objects to be clustered have sensitive attributes that should not be over- or underrepresented. We discuss the applicability of this fairness notion to Correlation Clustering. The existing literature on the resulting Fair Correlation Clustering problem either presents approximation algorithms with poor approximation guarantees or severely limits the possible distributions of the sensitive attribute (often only two manifestations with a 1:1 ratio are considered). Our goal is to understand if there is hope for better results in between these two extremes. To this end, we consider restricted graph classes which allow us to characterize the distributions of sensitive attributes for which this form of fairness is tractable from a complexity point of view. While existing work on Fair Correlation Clustering gives approximation algorithms, we focus on exact solutions and investigate whether there are efficiently solvable instances. The unfair version of Correlation Clustering is trivial on forests, but adding fairness creates a surprisingly rich picture of complexities. We give an overview of the distributions and types of forests where Fair Correlation Clustering turns from tractable to intractable. The most surprising insight to us is the fact that the cause of the hardness of Fair Correlation Clustering is not the strictness of the fairness condition.