Comparing Fairness of Generative Mobility Models
Daniel Wang, Jack McFarland, Afra Mashhadi, Ekin Ugurel

TL;DR
This paper evaluates the fairness of generative mobility models, introducing a framework that measures both utility and equity, and finds a trade-off between model accuracy and fairness across geographic regions.
Contribution
It proposes a novel fairness assessment framework for mobility models using CPC and demographic parity, revealing biases and trade-offs in existing models.
Findings
Traditional models are fairer but less accurate.
Deep Gravity achieves higher utility but amplifies biases.
Fairness metrics are crucial for equitable mobility modeling.
Abstract
This work examines the fairness of generative mobility models, addressing the often overlooked dimension of equity in model performance across geographic regions. Predictive models built on crowd flow data are instrumental in understanding urban structures and movement patterns; however, they risk embedding biases, particularly in spatiotemporal contexts where model performance may reflect and reinforce existing inequities tied to geographic distribution. We propose a novel framework for assessing fairness by measuring the utility and equity of generated traces. Utility is assessed via the Common Part of Commuters (CPC), a similarity metric comparing generated and real mobility flows, while fairness is evaluated using demographic parity. By reformulating demographic parity to reflect the difference in CPC distribution between two groups, our analysis reveals disparities in how various…
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsTransportation and Mobility Innovations
MethodsGravity
