Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Fairness Under Composition

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 1806.06122 v2 pith:2OFF65QH submitted 2018-06-15 cs.LG stat.ML

classification cs.LGstat.ML
keywords fairnesscompositionfairisolationsystemsunderalgorithmsdefinitions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Algorithmic fairness, and in particular the fairness of scoring and classification algorithms, has become a topic of increasing social concern and has recently witnessed an explosion of research in theoretical computer science, machine learning, statistics, the social sciences, and law. Much of the literature considers the case of a single classifier (or scoring function) used once, in isolation. In this work, we initiate the study of the fairness properties of systems composed of algorithms that are fair in isolation; that is, we study fairness under composition. We identify pitfalls of naive composition and give general constructions for fair composition, demonstrating both that classifiers that are fair in isolation do not necessarily compose into fair systems and also that seemingly unfair components may be carefully combined to construct fair systems. We focus primarily on the individual fairness setting proposed in [Dwork, Hardt, Pitassi, Reingold, Zemel, 2011], but also extend our results to a large class of group fairness definitions popular in the recent literature, exhibiting several cases in which group fairness definitions give misleading signals under composition.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Semivalue-based data valuation is arbitrary and gameable

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Semivalue-based data valuations are shown to be highly sensitive to plausible utility-function choices and are gameable under the paper's weak definition of gameability.

Pith tools