Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

SoK: Taming the Triangle -- On the Interplays between Fairness, Interpretability and Privacy in Machine Learning

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 2312.16191 v1 pith:6Z6TA7H4 submitted 2023-12-22 cs.LG cs.AI

SoK: Taming the Triangle -- On the Interplays between Fairness, Interpretability and Privacy in Machine Learning

classification cs.LG cs.AI
keywords learningmachinedifferentfairnessinterpretabilitypracticeprivacyrequirements
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Machine learning techniques are increasingly used for high-stakes decision-making, such as college admissions, loan attribution or recidivism prediction. Thus, it is crucial to ensure that the models learnt can be audited or understood by human users, do not create or reproduce discrimination or bias, and do not leak sensitive information regarding their training data. Indeed, interpretability, fairness and privacy are key requirements for the development of responsible machine learning, and all three have been studied extensively during the last decade. However, they were mainly considered in isolation, while in practice they interplay with each other, either positively or negatively. In this Systematization of Knowledge (SoK) paper, we survey the literature on the interactions between these three desiderata. More precisely, for each pairwise interaction, we summarize the identified synergies and tensions. These findings highlight several fundamental theoretical and empirical conflicts, while also demonstrating that jointly considering these different requirements is challenging when one aims at preserving a high level of utility. To solve this issue, we also discuss possible conciliation mechanisms, showing that a careful design can enable to successfully handle these different concerns in practice.

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. SoK: Colluding Adversaries in Machine Learning Pipelines

    cs.CR 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The paper introduces a framework for collusion between train- and inference-time adversaries in ML pipelines, proposes a guideline for conjecturing collusion potential, explains prior work, and empirically validates f...

  2. Crowding Out The Noise: Algorithmic Collective Action Under Differential Privacy

    cs.LG 2025-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Differential privacy reduces algorithmic collective action effectiveness, with formal lower bounds on success probability depending on collective size and privacy parameters, plus experimental verification on neural nets.