Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Investigating Trade-offs in Utility, Fairness and Differential Privacy in Neural Networks

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 2102.05975 v1 pith:TNR5HAJV submitted 2021-02-11 cs.LG cs.AI

classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords privacydifferencefairneuralriskaccuracyfairnessnetworks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

To enable an ethical and legal use of machine learning algorithms, they must both be fair and protect the privacy of those whose data are being used. However, implementing privacy and fairness constraints might come at the cost of utility (Jayaraman & Evans, 2019; Gong et al., 2020). This paper investigates the privacy-utility-fairness trade-off in neural networks by comparing a Simple (S-NN), a Fair (F-NN), a Differentially Private (DP-NN), and a Differentially Private and Fair Neural Network (DPF-NN) to evaluate differences in performance on metrics for privacy (epsilon, delta), fairness (risk difference), and utility (accuracy). In the scenario with the highest considered privacy guarantees (epsilon = 0.1, delta = 0.00001), the DPF-NN was found to achieve better risk difference than all the other neural networks with only a marginally lower accuracy than the S-NN and DP-NN. This model is considered fair as it achieved a risk difference below the strict (0.05) and lenient (0.1) thresholds. However, while the accuracy of the proposed model improved on previous work from Xu, Yuan and Wu (2019), the risk difference was found to be worse.

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. Engineering the Law-Machine Learning Translation Problem: Developing Legally Aligned Models

    cs.CY 2025-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A five-stage interdisciplinary framework integrates legal reasoning with ML development to design, evaluate, and select legally aligned models, illustrated with a hypothetical AML case study.

Pith tools