mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Fairness in Risk Assessment Instruments: Post-Processing to Achieve Counterfactual Equalized Odds

arXiv 2009.02841 ↗First posted 7 Sep 2020stat.MEcited by 40

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In domains such as criminal justice, medicine, and social welfare, decision makers increasingly have access to algorithmic Risk Assessment Instruments (RAIs). RAIs estimate the risk of an adverse outcome such as recidivism or child neglect, potentially informing high-stakes decisions such as whether to release a defendant on bail or initiate a child welfare investigation. It is important to ensure that RAIs are fair, so that the benefits and harms of such decisions are equitably distributed. The most widely used algorithmic fairness criteria are formulated with respect to observable outcomes, such as whether a person actually recidivates, but these criteria are misleading when applied to RAIs. Since RAIs are intended to inform interventions that can reduce risk, the prediction itself affects the downstream outcome. Recent work has argued that fairness criteria for RAIs should instead utilize potential outcomes, i.e. the outcomes that would occur in the absence of an appropriate intervention. However, no methods currently exist to satisfy such fairness criteria. In this paper, we target one such criterion, counterfactual equalized odds. We develop a post-processed predictor that is estimated via doubly robust estimators, extending and adapting previous post-processing approaches to the counterfactual setting. We also provide doubly robust estimators of the risk and fairness properties of arbitrary fixed post-processed predictors. Our predictor converges to an optimal fair predictor at fast rates. We illustrate properties of our method and show that it performs well on both simulated and real data.

Key facts. Cited by 40 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Sep 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 5; 2022: 9; 2023: 11; 2024: 5; 2025: 5; 2026: 5.

40 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2022Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 125
  2. 2022Causal Conceptions of Fairness and their Consequencescited by 38
  3. 2022Fairness Reprogrammingcited by 33
  4. 2022Adaptive Sampling Strategies to Construct Equitable Training Datasetscited by 18
  5. 2022What-is and How-to for Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey, Reflection, and Perspectivecited by 18
  6. 2023A Review of the Role of Causality in Developing Trustworthy AI Systemscited by 14
  7. 2021Through the Data Management Lens: Experimental Analysis and Evaluation of Fair Classificationcited by 13
  8. 2021FADE: FAir Double Ensemble Learning for Observable and Counterfactual Outcomescited by 13
  9. 2024The Pursuit of Fairness in Artificial Intelligence Models: A Surveycited by 13
  10. 2022Fair When Trained, Unfair When Deployed: Observable Fairness Measures are Unstable in Performative Prediction Settingscited by 11
  11. 2021On the Fairness of Machine-Assisted Human Decisionscited by 10
  12. 2022FAIR-FATE: Fair Federated Learning with Momentumcited by 10
28 more
  1. 2023Fair Wasserstein Coresetscited by 8
  2. 2024The Fragility of Fairness: Causal Sensitivity Analysis for Fair Machine Learningcited by 8
  3. 2022Robust Design and Evaluation of Predictive Algorithms under Unobserved Confoundingcited by 7
  4. 2023Tier Balancing: Towards Dynamic Fairness over Underlying Causal Factorscited by 7
  5. 2023Toward Operationalizing Pipeline-aware ML Fairness: A Research Agenda for Developing Practical Guidelines and Toolscited by 7
  6. 2023Fair and Robust Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects for Policy Learningcited by 6
  7. 2024Auditing Fairness under Unobserved Confoundingcited by 6
  8. 2023Doubly Robust Counterfactual Classificationcited by 5
  9. 2023Multi-dimensional Fair Federated Learningcited by 4
  10. 2023Procedural Fairness Through Decoupling Objectionable Data Generating Componentscited by 3
  11. 2021Hard Choices and Hard Limits for Artificial Intelligencecited by 2
  12. 2023Counterfactual Reasoning for Bias Evaluation and Detection in a Fairness under Unawareness settingcited by 2
  13. 2024Specification Overfitting in Artificial Intelligencecited by 2
  14. 2024Counterfactual Fairness through Transforming Data Orthogonal to Biascited by 2
  15. 2021Increasing Fairness in Predictions Using Bias Parity Score Based Loss Function Regularizationcited by 1
  16. 2022Principled Diverse Counterfactuals in Multilinear Modelscited by 1
  17. 2023Migrate Demographic Group For Fair GNNscited by 0
  18. 2023Mind the Gap: Optimal and Equitable Encouragement Policiescited by 0
  19. 2025A Critical Review of Predominant Bias in Neural Networkscited by 0
  20. 2025Position: Beyond Sensitive Attributes, ML Fairness Should Quantify Structural Injustice via Social Determinantscited by 0
  21. 2025"I think this is fair": Uncovering the Complexities of Stakeholder Decision-Making in AI Fairness Assessmentcited by 0
  22. 2025Partial Identification Approach to Counterfactual Fairness Assessmentcited by 0
  23. 2025Incorporating Fairness in Neighborhood Graphs for Fair Spectral Clusteringcited by 0
  24. 2026Measures of classification bias derived from sample size analysiscited by 0
  25. 2026Empowering Affected Individuals to Shape AI Fairness Assessments: Processes, Criteria, and Toolscited by 0
  26. 2026CAFP: A Post-Processing Framework for Group Fairness via Counterfactual Model Averagingcited by 0
  27. 2026Confronting Label Indeterminacy in Automated Bail Decisionscited by 0
  28. 2026A Statistical Framework for Data-Driven Discovery of Differential Performance in Clinical Risk Prediction Modelscited by 0