mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Information Theoretic Measures for Fairness-aware Feature Selection

arXiv 2106.00772 ↗First posted 1 Jun 2021cs.LG cs.CY cs.ITcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine learning algorithms are increasingly used for consequential decision making regarding individuals based on their relevant features. Features that are relevant for accurate decisions may however lead to either explicit or implicit forms of discrimination against unprivileged groups, such as those of certain race or gender. This happens due to existing biases in the training data, which are often replicated or even exacerbated by the learning algorithm. Identifying and measuring these biases at the data level is a challenging problem due to the interdependence among the features, and the decision outcome. In this work, we develop a framework for fairness-aware feature selection which takes into account the correlation among the features and the decision outcome, and is based on information theoretic measures for the accuracy and discriminatory impacts of features. In particular, we first propose information theoretic measures which quantify the impact of different subsets of features on the accuracy and discrimination of the decision outcomes. We then deduce the marginal impact of each feature using Shapley value function; a solution concept in cooperative game theory used to estimate marginal contributions of players in a coalitional game. Finally, we design a fairness utility score for each feature (for feature selection) which quantifies how this feature influences accurate as well as nondiscriminatory decisions. Our framework depends on the joint statistics of the data rather than a particular classifier design. We examine our proposed framework on real and synthetic data to evaluate its performance.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jun 2021.

Builds on

17 of 44 references.

References · 17

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  2. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  3. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  4. 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
  5. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  6. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
  7. 2016Fairness Beyond Disparate Treatment & Disparate Impact: Learning Classification without Disparate Mistreatmentcited by 368
  8. 2016European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation"cited by 343
  9. 2017Avoiding Discrimination through Causal Reasoningcited by 191
  10. 2016Fairness in Learning: Classic and Contextual Banditscited by 167
  11. 2019Identifying and Correcting Label Bias in Machine Learningcited by 146
  12. 2016A Confidence-Based Approach for Balancing Fairness and Accuracycited by 73
5 more
  1. 2019Repairing without Retraining: Avoiding Disparate Impact with Counterfactual Distributionscited by 48
  2. 2019Estimating Skin Tone and Effects on Classification Performance in Dermatology Datasetscited by 29
  3. 2018Fairness in Supervised Learning: An Information Theoretic Approachcited by 17
  4. 2021Cohort Shapley value for algorithmic fairnesscited by 12
  5. 2018On the Direction of Discrimination: An Information-Theoretic Analysis of Disparate Impact in Machine Learningcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

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

4 papers.