Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Survey on Causal-based Machine Learning Fairness Notions

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 2010.09553 v7 pith:6K427EU4 submitted 2020-10-19 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords fairnessnotionscausal-basedquantitiesdatadefinedframeworklearning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Addressing the problem of fairness is crucial to safely use machine learning algorithms to support decisions with a critical impact on people's lives such as job hiring, child maltreatment, disease diagnosis, loan granting, etc. Several notions of fairness have been defined and examined in the past decade, such as statistical parity and equalized odds. The most recent fairness notions, however, are causal-based and reflect the now widely accepted idea that using causality is necessary to appropriately address the problem of fairness. This paper examines an exhaustive list of causal-based fairness notions and study their applicability in real-world scenarios. As the majority of causal-based fairness notions are defined in terms of non-observable quantities (e.g., interventions and counterfactuals), their deployment in practice requires to compute or estimate those quantities using observational data. This paper offers a comprehensive report of the different approaches to infer causal quantities from observational data including identifiability (Pearl's SCM framework) and estimation (potential outcome framework). The main contributions of this survey paper are (1) a guideline to help selecting a suitable fairness notion given a specific real-world scenario, and (2) a ranking of the fairness notions according to Pearl's causation ladder indicating how difficult it is to deploy each notion in practice.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Position: Beyond Sensitive Attributes, ML Fairness Should Quantify Structural Injustice via Social Determinants

    cs.CY 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fairness auditing should target social determinants that carry structural injustice, because mitigating on sensitive attributes alone can create new harms.

  2. Exploring Fairness Interventions in Open Source Projects

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Only 32% of 62 open source fairness interventions are actively maintained, and support is concentrated in classification models and inprocessing mitigation.

  3. Exploring the Landscape of Fairness Interventions in Software Engineering

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A survey of fairness interventions in software engineering that organizes prior work into a taxonomy and adds a small empirical analysis of open-source fairness repository maintenance.

Pith tools