Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Normalise for Fairness: A Simple Normalisation Technique for Fairness in Regression Machine Learning Problems

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 2202.00993 v2 pith:E26IDS3A submitted 2022-02-02 cs.LG cs.CY

classification cs.LGcs.CY
keywords fairnessproblemsbalancingdatamethodperformanceregressionadversarial
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Algorithms and Machine Learning (ML) are increasingly affecting everyday life and several decision-making processes, where ML has an advantage due to scalability or superior performance. Fairness in such applications is crucial, where models should not discriminate their results based on race, gender, or other protected groups. This is especially crucial for models affecting very sensitive topics, like interview invitation or recidivism prediction. Fairness is not commonly studied for regression problems compared to binary classification problems; hence, we present a simple, yet effective method based on normalisation (FaiReg), which minimises the impact of unfairness in regression problems, especially due to labelling bias. We present a theoretical analysis of the method, in addition to an empirical comparison against two standard methods for fairness, namely data balancing and adversarial training. We also include a hybrid formulation (FaiRegH), merging the presented method with data balancing, in an attempt to face labelling and sampling biases simultaneously. The experiments are conducted on the multimodal dataset First Impressions (FI) with various labels, namely Big-Five personality prediction and interview screening score. The results show the superior performance of diminishing the effects of unfairness better than data balancing, also without deteriorating the performance of the original problem as much as adversarial training. Fairness is evaluated based on the Equal Accuracy (EA) and Statistical Parity (SP) constraints. The experiments present a setup that enhances the fairness for several protected variables simultaneously.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. Intersectional Divergence: Measuring Fairness in Regression

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Intersectional Divergence is a new regression fairness measure that combines group error differences with relevance-weighted target values, and it can be optimized as a loss to reduce unfairness.

Pith tools