Model Mis-specification and Algorithmic Bias
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning algorithms are increasingly used to inform critical decisions. There is a growing concern about bias, that algorithms may produce uneven outcomes for individuals in different demographic groups. In this work, we measure bias as the difference between mean prediction errors across groups. We show that even with unbiased input data, when a model is mis-specified: (1) population-level mean prediction error can still be negligible, but group-level mean prediction errors can be large; (2) such errors are not equal across groups; and (3) the difference between errors, i.e., bias, can take the worst-case realization. That is, when there are two groups of the same size, mean prediction errors for these two groups have the same magnitude but opposite signs. In closed form, we show such errors and bias are functions of the first and second moments of the joint distribution of features (for linear and probit regressions). We also conduct numerical experiments to show similar results in more general settings. Our work provides a first step for decoupling the impact of different causes of bias.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 May 2021.
Builds on
7 of 12 references.
References · 7
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
- 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 804
- 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 672
- 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 586
- 2017Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Artcited by 315
- 2019Fair Regression: Quantitative Definitions and Reduction-based Algorithmscited by 168
Built on by
Not cited yet.