pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.00250 · v2 · pith:TZMIP55J · submitted 2019-06-01 · cs.LG · cs.CY· stat.ML

Metric Learning for Individual Fairness

pith:TZMIP55Jopen to challenge →

classification cs.LG cs.CYstat.ML
keywords fairnessmetricindividualindividualssimilarityapproximationsarbiterhuman
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

There has been much discussion recently about how fairness should be measured or enforced in classification. Individual Fairness [Dwork, Hardt, Pitassi, Reingold, Zemel, 2012], which requires that similar individuals be treated similarly, is a highly appealing definition as it gives strong guarantees on treatment of individuals. Unfortunately, the need for a task-specific similarity metric has prevented its use in practice. In this work, we propose a solution to the problem of approximating a metric for Individual Fairness based on human judgments. Our model assumes that we have access to a human fairness arbiter, who can answer a limited set of queries concerning similarity of individuals for a particular task, is free of explicit biases and possesses sufficient domain knowledge to evaluate similarity. Our contributions include definitions for metric approximation relevant for Individual Fairness, constructions for approximations from a limited number of realistic queries to the arbiter on a sample of individuals, and learning procedures to construct hypotheses for metric approximations which generalize to unseen samples under certain assumptions of learnability of distance threshold functions.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Do Fair Models Reason Fairly? Counterfactual Explanation Consistency for Procedural Fairness in Credit Decisions

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Outcome-fair credit models often exhibit hidden procedural bias through inconsistent reasoning across groups, which the CEC framework mitigates by enforcing consistent feature attributions via counterfactuals.

  2. Fairness of Explanations in Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Unifying Framework, Axioms, and Future Direction toward Responsible AI

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A conditional invariance framework defines explanation fairness as explanations being statistically independent of protected attributes given task-relevant features, unifying existing metrics and enabling procedural b...