REVIEW 3 cited by
On the (im)possibility of fairness
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
What does it mean for an algorithm to be fair? Different papers use different notions of algorithmic fairness, and although these appear internally consistent, they also seem mutually incompatible. We present a mathematical setting in which the distinctions in previous papers can be made formal. In addition to characterizing the spaces of inputs (the "observed" space) and outputs (the "decision" space), we introduce the notion of a construct space: a space that captures unobservable, but meaningful variables for the prediction. We show that in order to prove desirable properties of the entire decision-making process, different mechanisms for fairness require different assumptions about the nature of the mapping from construct space to decision space. The results in this paper imply that future treatments of algorithmic fairness should more explicitly state assumptions about the relationship between constructs and observations.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Unmasking LAION-5B: Age, Gender, Race, and Emotion Biases in Large-Scale Image Datasets
Empirical audit of LAION-2B-en and LAION-2B-multi finds overrepresentation of young adults, White people, and males plus stereotypical emotion associations across two attribute classifiers.
-
Overcoming Fairness Trade-offs via Pre-processing: A Causal Perspective
Using the FiND world, a hypothetical fair world where protected attributes have no causal effect on the target, the authors show that fairness metrics become compatible and fairness aligns with accuracy, and that pre-...
-
Operational AI Deployment Assurance: Governance-State Orchestration Under Threshold-Sensitive Deployment Conditions -- A Governance Framework for High-Stakes AI Systems
Introduces the OADA governance framework that links fairness disagreement, subgroup instability, and operational uncertainty to deployment-oriented assurance decisions, readiness classifications, and escalation states.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.