Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Leave-one-out Unfairness

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 2107.10171 v1 pith:C2G3NIM2 submitted 2021-07-21 cs.LG cs.CY

classification cs.LGcs.CY
keywords leave-one-outunfairnessdatatrainingfairnessindividualmodeldeep
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce leave-one-out unfairness, which characterizes how likely a model's prediction for an individual will change due to the inclusion or removal of a single other person in the model's training data. Leave-one-out unfairness appeals to the idea that fair decisions are not arbitrary: they should not be based on the chance event of any one person's inclusion in the training data. Leave-one-out unfairness is closely related to algorithmic stability, but it focuses on the consistency of an individual point's prediction outcome over unit changes to the training data, rather than the error of the model in aggregate. Beyond formalizing leave-one-out unfairness, we characterize the extent to which deep models behave leave-one-out unfairly on real data, including in cases where the generalization error is small. Further, we demonstrate that adversarial training and randomized smoothing techniques have opposite effects on leave-one-out fairness, which sheds light on the relationships between robustness, memorization, individual fairness, and leave-one-out fairness in deep models. Finally, we discuss salient practical applications that may be negatively affected by leave-one-out unfairness.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Testing Most Influential Sets

    stat.ML 2025-10 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    Maximum influence of the most influential k-point subset in OLS follows a Fréchet distribution (heavy tails, fixed k) or Gumbel distribution (light tails or growing k), enabling tests of excessive influence.

Pith tools