Fairness Improvement with Multiple Protected Attributes: How Far Are We?

Zhenpeng Chen, Jie M. Zhang, Federica Sarro, Mark Harman
7/25/2023
cs.LGcs.AIcs.CY

Official code: chenzhenpeng18/ICSE24-Multi-Attribute-Fairness (3 stars, last commit 2024-01-16).

Abstract

Existing research mostly improves the fairness of Machine Learning (ML) software regarding a single protected attribute at a time, but this is unrealistic given that many users have multiple protected attributes. This paper conducts an extensive study of fairness improvement regarding multiple protected attributes, covering 11 state-of-the-art fairness improvement methods. We analyze the effectiveness of these methods with different datasets, metrics, and ML models when considering multiple protected attributes. The results reveal that improving fairness for a single protected attribute can largely decrease fairness regarding unconsidered protected attributes. This decrease is observed in up to 88.3% of scenarios (57.5% on average). More surprisingly, we find little difference in accuracy loss when considering single and multiple protected attributes, indicating that accuracy can be maintained in the multiple-attribute paradigm. However, the effect on F1-score when handling two protected attributes is about twice that of a single attribute. This has important implications for future fairness research: reporting only accuracy as the ML performance metric, which is currently common in the literature, is inadequate.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations(1)

31PythonOct 20, 20232 years ago

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{chen2023fairness,
  title  = {Fairness Improvement with Multiple Protected Attributes: How Far Are We?},
  author = {Zhenpeng Chen and Jie M. Zhang and Federica Sarro and Mark Harman},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2308.01923},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2308.01923v3}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2308.01923.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2308.01923)

Discussion