REVIEW 2 cited by
Long-Term Fairness Inquiries and Pursuits in Machine Learning: A Survey of Notions, Methods, and Challenges
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
read the original abstract
The widespread integration of Machine Learning systems in daily life, particularly in high-stakes domains, has raised concerns about the fairness implications. While prior works have investigated static fairness measures, recent studies reveal that automated decision-making has long-term implications and that off-the-shelf fairness approaches may not serve the purpose of achieving long-term fairness. Additionally, the existence of feedback loops and the interaction between models and the environment introduces additional complexities that may deviate from the initial fairness goals. In this survey, we review existing literature on long-term fairness from different perspectives and present a taxonomy for long-term fairness studies. We highlight key challenges and consider future research directions, analyzing both current issues and potential further explorations.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Transparent and Fair Profiling in Employment Services: Evidence from Switzerland
On Swiss employment data, explainable boosting machines predict long-term unemployment almost as accurately as XGBoost while remaining fully interpretable.
-
A Taxonomy of Real-World Defeaters in Safety Assurance Cases
A systematic review yields a seven-category taxonomy of defeaters in safety assurance cases: logical, contextual, evidence-validity, requirements, structural, adversarial, and uncertainty.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.