Toward Unifying Group Fairness Evaluation from a Sparsity Perspective

Zhecheng Sheng, Jiawei Zhang, Enmao Diao
11/1/2025
cs.LGcs.AIcs.CY

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 1 possible match can be shown below.

Abstract

Ensuring algorithmic fairness remains a significant challenge in machine learning, particularly as models are increasingly applied across diverse domains. While numerous fairness criteria exist, they often lack generalizability across different machine learning problems. This paper examines the connections and differences among various sparsity measures in promoting fairness and proposes a unified sparsity-based framework for evaluating algorithmic fairness. The framework aligns with existing fairness criteria and demonstrates broad applicability to a wide range of machine learning tasks. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework as an evaluation metric through extensive experiments on a variety of datasets and bias mitigation methods. This work provides a novel perspective to algorithmic fairness by framing it through the lens of sparsity and social equity, offering potential for broader impact on fairness research and applications.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 1 weaker match is hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{sheng2025toward,
  title  = {Toward Unifying Group Fairness Evaluation from a Sparsity Perspective},
  author = {Zhecheng Sheng and Jiawei Zhang and Enmao Diao},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2511.00359},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.00359v1}
}

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/2511.00359.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2511.00359)

Discussion