Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithm

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1706.06368 v3 pith:ACS4H772 submitted 2017-06-20 cs.CY cs.IR

FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithm

classification cs.CY cs.IR
keywords candidatestop-keveryfairnessgrouprankingalgorithmcandidate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

In this work, we define and solve the Fair Top-k Ranking problem, in which we want to determine a subset of k candidates from a large pool of n >> k candidates, maximizing utility (i.e., select the "best" candidates) subject to group fairness criteria. Our ranked group fairness definition extends group fairness using the standard notion of protected groups and is based on ensuring that the proportion of protected candidates in every prefix of the top-k ranking remains statistically above or indistinguishable from a given minimum. Utility is operationalized in two ways: (i) every candidate included in the top-$k$ should be more qualified than every candidate not included; and (ii) for every pair of candidates in the top-k, the more qualified candidate should be ranked above. An efficient algorithm is presented for producing the Fair Top-k Ranking, and tested experimentally on existing datasets as well as new datasets released with this paper, showing that our approach yields small distortions with respect to rankings that maximize utility without considering fairness criteria. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first algorithm grounded in statistical tests that can mitigate biases in the representation of an under-represented group along a ranked list.

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. A Case Study of Balanced Query Recommendation on Wikipedia

    cs.IR 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0

    BalancedQR, extended to handle multiple bias dimensions with a Pareto front, recommends less biased Wikipedia queries, and a GloVe-plus-LLM candidate generation method dominates alternatives.

  2. CaTE Data Curation for Trustworthy AI

    cs.LG 2025-08 accept novelty 4.0

    A synthesis of data curation practices for trustworthy AI, framed around an actionable definition of trustworthiness and a decision tree.