{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2016:BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2","short_pith_number":"pith:BHVNMED7","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"09ead6107f3983624067796be775de268b9963334e2d3ebaf2e41b13fd485421","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"1609.05807","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CY","stat.ML"],"primary_cat":"cs.LG","authors_text":"Jon Kleinberg, Manish Raghavan, Sendhil Mullainathan","submitted_at":"2016-09-19T16:08:51Z","abstract_excerpt":"Recent discussion in the public sphere about algorithmic classification has involved tension between competing notions of what it means for a probabilistic classification to be fair to different groups. We formalize three fairness conditions that lie at the heart of these debates, and we prove that except in highly constrained special cases, there is no method that can satisfy these three conditions simultaneously. Moreover, even satisfying all three conditions approximately requires that the data lie in an approximate version of one of the constrained special cases identified by our theorem. "},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"1609.05807","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","primary_cat":"cs.LG","submitted_at":"2016-09-19T16:08:51Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.CY","stat.ML"],"title_canon_sha256":"31cb5aafe51d4e81730b03d665b01395ca63383c915426ec5bf83b524656e06b","abstract_canon_sha256":"17fac61531e407176bdb9d1cab9621442a28e379c975a28384e26f8468b76a23"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.773165Z","signature_b64":"5S6e2nJwFeUq8y040atHG3W/giewPAuK+qedH+VKpKaGC4P2UHnsmLbXGRHBFHcZguZFSYl7bcdOnst/RetRBg==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"09ead6107f3983624067796be775de268b9963334e2d3ebaf2e41b13fd485421","last_reissued_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.772669Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.772669Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CY","stat.ML"],"primary_cat":"cs.LG","authors_text":"Jon Kleinberg, Manish Raghavan, Sendhil Mullainathan","submitted_at":"2016-09-19T16:08:51Z","abstract_excerpt":"Recent discussion in the public sphere about algorithmic classification has involved tension between competing notions of what it means for a probabilistic classification to be fair to different groups. We formalize three fairness conditions that lie at the heart of these debates, and we prove that except in highly constrained special cases, there is no method that can satisfy these three conditions simultaneously. Moreover, even satisfying all three conditions approximately requires that the data lie in an approximate version of one of the constrained special cases identified by our theorem. "},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"1609.05807","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"1609.05807","created_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.772764+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"1609.05807v2","created_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.772764+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.1609.05807","created_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.772764+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"BHVNMED7HGBW","created_at":"2026-05-18T12:30:07.202191+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"BHVNMED7HGBWEQDH","created_at":"2026-05-18T12:30:07.202191+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"BHVNMED7","created_at":"2026-05-18T12:30:07.202191+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":19,"internal_anchor_count":16,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.26200","citing_title":"Statistical and Structural Approaches to Algorithmic Fairness","ref_index":26,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.20544","citing_title":"Toward Calibrated Mixture-of-Experts Under Distribution Shift","ref_index":15,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.16723","citing_title":"AgentFairBench: Do LLM Agents Discriminate When They Act?","ref_index":25,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.10126","citing_title":"Pareto-Guided Teacher Alignment for Fair Personalized Text Generation","ref_index":23,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.06830","citing_title":"Learning Fair Demand Models","ref_index":28,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.02902","citing_title":"Fairness Definitions and Metrics in Deep Reinforcement Learning for Drug Discovery in Healthcare: A Rapid Evidence Review","ref_index":13,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.16237","citing_title":"Inside Baseball: The Automated Ball-Strike System as an Object Lesson in Technological Rule Enforcement","ref_index":49,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.24149","citing_title":"What Medicine Taught Us About Fairness and What It Missed: Lessons from Reconsidering Race-Specific Lung Function Reference Algorithms","ref_index":53,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.00656","citing_title":"Demystifying the Optimal Fair Classifier in Multi-Class Classification","ref_index":224,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.09881","citing_title":"Toward Calibrated, Fair, and accurate Deepfake Detection","ref_index":91,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.23136","citing_title":"A Gaia-linked High-purity QSO Candidate Catalog in Selected Fields with Extinction-binned Calibration and Spectrum-informed Training","ref_index":34,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.22291","citing_title":"Long-term Fairness with Selective Labels","ref_index":45,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2008.02275","citing_title":"Aligning AI With Shared Human Values","ref_index":17,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.16237","citing_title":"Inside Baseball: The Automated Ball-Strike System as an Object Lesson in Technological Rule Enforcement","ref_index":49,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2507.09233","citing_title":"Secondary Bounded Rationality: A Theory of How Algorithms Reproduce Structural Inequality in AI Hiring","ref_index":31,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2602.00065","citing_title":"Responsible Evaluation of AI for Mental Health","ref_index":9,"is_internal_anchor":true},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.03900","citing_title":"Contextual Multi-Objective Optimization: Rethinking Objectives in Frontier AI Systems","ref_index":21,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.01961","citing_title":"Multi-User Dueling Bandits: A Fair Approach using Nash Social Welfare","ref_index":25,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2604.06378","citing_title":"Revisiting Fairness Impossibility with Endogenous Behavior","ref_index":6,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2","json":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/BHVNMED7"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/BHVNMED7","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=1609.05807&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/BHVNMED7HGBWEQDHPFV6O5O6E2/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.772764+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-18T00:58:03.772764+00:00"}