# Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.02413 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02413/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2,000 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2016.

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 2000)

- [A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03109/) (2023)
- [Aligning AI With Shared Human Values](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.02275/) (2020)
- [Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00770/) (2023)
- [Just Train Twice: Improving Group Robustness without Training Group Information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.09044/) (2021)
- [Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.04884/) (2021)
- [Towards Out-Of-Distribution Generalization: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.13624/) (2021)
- [Last Layer Re-Training is Sufficient for Robustness to Spurious Correlations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.02937/) (2022)
- [A Field Guide to Federated Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.06917/) (2021)
- [Unsolved Problems in ML Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.13916/) (2021)
- [From Pretraining Data to Language Models to Downstream Tasks: Tracking the Trails of Political Biases Leading to Unfair NLP Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08283/) (2023)
- [Self-Preference Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21819/) (2024)
- [Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practices](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.01167/) (2021)
- [Societal Biases in Language Generation: Progress and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.04054/) (2021)
- [Causal Inference in Natural Language Processing: Estimation, Prediction, Interpretation and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.00725/) (2021)
- [Heterogeneous Federated Learning: State-of-the-art and Research Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.10616/) (2023)
- [A survey on datasets for fairness-aware machine learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.00530/) (2021)
- [On Feature Learning in the Presence of Spurious Correlations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.11369/) (2022)
- [Benchmark Data Contamination of Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.04244/) (2024)
- [Towards a Unified Framework for Fair and Stable Graph Representation Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.13186/) (2021)
- [Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.07068/) (2022)
- [A Comprehensive Survey on Trustworthy Graph Neural Networks: Privacy, Robustness, Fairness, and Explainability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.08570/) (2022)
- [Data Collection and Quality Challenges in Deep Learning: A Data-Centric AI Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.06409/) (2021)
- [Jury Learning: Integrating Dissenting Voices into Machine Learning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.02950/) (2022)
- [FairFed: Enabling Group Fairness in Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.00857/) (2021)
- [Fair Mixup: Fairness via Interpolation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.06503/) (2021)
- [DECAF: Generating Fair Synthetic Data Using Causally-Aware Generative Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.12884/) (2021)
- [A Clarification of the Nuances in the Fairness Metrics Landscape](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.00467/) (2021)
- [Linear Adversarial Concept Erasure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.12091/) (2022)
- [Challenges in Automated Debiasing for Toxic Language Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.00086/) (2021)
- [Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.06641/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We propose a criterion for discrimination against a specified sensitive attribute in supervised learning, where the goal is to predict some target based on available features. Assuming data about the predictor, target, and membership in the protected group are available, we show how to optimally adjust any learned predictor so as to remove discrimination according to our definition. Our framework also improves incentives by shifting the cost of poor classification from disadvantaged groups to the decision maker, who can respond by improving the classification accuracy. In line with other studies, our notion is oblivious: it depends only on the joint statistics of the predictor, the target and the protected attribute, but not on interpretation of individualfeatures. We study the inherent limits of defining and identifying biases based on such oblivious measures, outlining what can and cannot be inferred from different oblivious tests. We illustrate our notion using a case study of FICO credit scores.