mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Measuring Non-Expert Comprehension of Machine Learning Fairness Metrics

arXiv 2001.00089 ↗First posted 17 Dec 2019cs.CY cs.AI cs.LGcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Bias in machine learning has manifested injustice in several areas, such as medicine, hiring, and criminal justice. In response, computer scientists have developed myriad definitions of fairness to correct this bias in fielded algorithms. While some definitions are based on established legal and ethical norms, others are largely mathematical. It is unclear whether the general public agrees with these fairness definitions, and perhaps more importantly, whether they understand these definitions. We take initial steps toward bridging this gap between ML researchers and the public, by addressing the question: does a lay audience understand a basic definition of ML fairness? We develop a metric to measure comprehension of three such definitions--demographic parity, equal opportunity, and equalized odds. We evaluate this metric using an online survey, and investigate the relationship between comprehension and sentiment, demographics, and the definition itself.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 17 Dec 2019.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 2; 2024: 1.

4 papers.