Model Selection's Disparate Impact in Real-World Deep Learning Applications
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Algorithmic fairness has emphasized the role of biased data in automated decision outcomes. Recently, there has been a shift in attention to sources of bias that implicate fairness in other stages in the ML pipeline. We contend that one source of such bias, human preferences in model selection, remains under-explored in terms of its role in disparate impact across demographic groups. Using a deep learning model trained on real-world medical imaging data, we verify our claim empirically and argue that choice of metric for model comparison, especially those that do not take variability into account, can significantly bias model selection outcomes.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2021.
Builds on
17 of 37 references.
References · 17
- 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,498
- 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,156
- 2017Deep Reinforcement Learning that Matterscited by 754
- 2017CheXNet: Radiologist-Level Pneumonia Detection on Chest X-Rays with Deep Learningcited by 461
- 2019Differential Privacy Has Disparate Impact on Model Accuracycited by 316
- 2019Measurement and Fairnesscited by 308
- 2017The Marginal Value of Adaptive Gradient Methods in Machine Learningcited by 250
- 2020CheXclusion: Fairness gaps in deep chest X-ray classifierscited by 153
- 2019Does Object Recognition Work for Everyone?cited by 151
- 2019On Empirical Comparisons of Optimizers for Deep Learningcited by 103
- 2019Problem Formulation and Fairnesscited by 85
5 more
- 2019Mathematical Notions vs. Human Perception of Fairness: A Descriptive Approach to Fairness for Machine Learningcited by 57
- 2019Roles for Computing in Social Changecited by 49
- 2020Bringing the People Back In: Contesting Benchmark Machine Learning Datasetscited by 43
- 2021Hyperparameter Optimization Is Deceiving Us, and How to Stop Itcited by 20
- 2019Individual predictions matter: Assessing the effect of data ordering in training fine-tuned CNNs for medical imagingcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 3; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.
7 papers.
- 2022Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility, and Robustness in Machine Learningcited by 48
- 2025Systemizing Multiplicity: The Curious Case of Arbitrariness in Machine Learningcited by 17
- 2023REFORMS: Reporting Standards for Machine Learning Based Sciencecited by 13
- 2023On (assessing) the fairness of risk score modelscited by 12
- 2022Evaluation Beyond Task Performance: Analyzing Concepts in AlphaZero in Hexcited by 8
- 2024What Constitutes a Less Discriminatory Algorithm?cited by 8
- 2022Non-Determinism and the Lawlessness of Machine Learning Codecited by 7
- 2025Systemizing Multiplicity: The Curious Case of Arbitrariness in Machine Learning24 Jan 2025
- 2024What Constitutes a Less Discriminatory Algorithm?24 Dec 2024
- 2023REFORMS: Reporting Standards for Machine Learning Based Science15 Aug 2023
- 2023On (assessing) the fairness of risk score models17 Feb 2023
- 2022Evaluation Beyond Task Performance: Analyzing Concepts in AlphaZero in Hex26 Nov 2022
- 2022Non-Determinism and the Lawlessness of Machine Learning Code23 Jun 2022
- 2022Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility, and Robustness in Machine Learning10 Feb 2022