# Measurement and Fairness

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.05511 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.05511/

## Key facts

- Cited by 308 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 11 Dec 2019.

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 308)

- [PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.02311/) (2022)
- [OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.01068/) (2022)
- [PaLM 2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10403/) (2023)
- [GLaM: Efficient Scaling of Language Models with Mixture-of-Experts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.06905/) (2021)
- [GLM-130B: An Open Bilingual Pre-trained Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.02414/) (2022)
- [Capabilities of GPT-4 on Medical Challenge Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.13375/) (2023)
- [Safe Latent Diffusion: Mitigating Inappropriate Degeneration in Diffusion Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.05105/) (2022)
- [DExperts: Decoding-Time Controlled Text Generation with Experts and Anti-Experts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.03023/) (2021)
- [AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.15366/) (2021)
- [Auditing large language models: a three-layered approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08500/) (2023)
- [Harms from Increasingly Agentic Algorithmic Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.10329/) (2023)
- [Collective Constitutional AI: Aligning a Language Model with Public Input](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07814/) (2024)
- [Gender Bias in Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.06001/) (2021)
- [Understanding and Evaluating Racial Biases in Image Captioning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.08503/) (2021)
- [Capturing Failures of Large Language Models via Human Cognitive Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.12299/) (2022)
- [Picking on the Same Person: Does Algorithmic Monoculture lead to Outcome Homogenization?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.13972/) (2022)
- [The Fallacy of AI Functionality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.09511/) (2022)
- [A Survey on Bias in Visual Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.07919/) (2021)
- [On Measures of Biases and Harms in NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.03362/) (2021)
- [Consequences of Misaligned AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.03896/) (2021)
- [Fairlearn: Assessing and Improving Fairness of AI Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16626/) (2023)
- [Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Support](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.05675/) (2021)
- [Towards Intersectionality in Machine Learning: Including More Identities, Handling Underrepresentation, and Performing Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.04610/) (2022)
- [AART: AI-Assisted Red-Teaming with Diverse Data Generation for New LLM-powered Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08592/) (2023)
- [Post-Hoc Explanations Fail to Achieve their Purpose in Adversarial Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.10295/) (2022)
- [Improving the Fairness of Chest X-ray Classifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.12609/) (2022)
- [Evaluation Gaps in Machine Learning Practice](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.05256/) (2022)
- [Designing Disaggregated Evaluations of AI Systems: Choices, Considerations, and Tradeoffs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.06076/) (2021)
- [Fairness for Unobserved Characteristics: Insights from Technological Impacts on Queer Communities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.04257/) (2021)
- [Neither Valid nor Reliable? Investigating the Use of LLMs as Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.18076/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We propose measurement modeling from the quantitative social sciences as a framework for understanding fairness in computational systems. Computational systems often involve unobservable theoretical constructs, such as socioeconomic status, teacher effectiveness, and risk of recidivism. Such constructs cannot be measured directly and must instead be inferred from measurements of observable properties (and other unobservable theoretical constructs) thought to be related to them -- i.e., operationalized via a measurement model. This process, which necessarily involves making assumptions, introduces the potential for mismatches between the theoretical understanding of the construct purported to be measured and its operationalization. We argue that many of the harms discussed in the literature on fairness in computational systems are direct results of such mismatches. We show how some of these harms could have been anticipated and, in some cases, mitigated if viewed through the lens of measurement modeling. To do this, we contribute fairness-oriented conceptualizations of construct reliability and construct validity that unite traditions from political science, education, and psychology and provide a set of tools for making explicit and testing assumptions about constructs and their operationalizations. We then turn to fairness itself, an essentially contested construct that has different theoretical understandings in different contexts. We argue that this contestedness underlies recent debates about fairness definitions: although these debates appear to be about different operationalizations, they are, in fact, debates about different theoretical understandings of fairness. We show how measurement modeling can provide a framework for getting to the core of these debates.