mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Impossibility results for fair representations

arXiv 2107.03483 ↗First posted 7 Jul 2021cs.LG stat.MLcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

With the growing awareness to fairness in machine learning and the realization of the central role that data representation has in data processing tasks, there is an obvious interest in notions of fair data representations. The goal of such representations is that a model trained on data under the representation (e.g., a classifier) will be guaranteed to respect some fairness constraints. Such representations are useful when they can be fixed for training models on various different tasks and also when they serve as data filtering between the raw data (known to the representation designer) and potentially malicious agents that use the data under the representation to learn predictive models and make decisions. A long list of recent research papers strive to provide tools for achieving these goals. However, we prove that this is basically a futile effort. Roughly stated, we prove that no representation can guarantee the fairness of classifiers for different tasks trained using it; even the basic goal of achieving label-independent Demographic Parity fairness fails once the marginal data distribution shifts. More refined notions of fairness, like Odds Equality, cannot be guaranteed by a representation that does not take into account the task specific labeling rule with respect to which such fairness will be evaluated (even if the marginal data distribution is known a priory). Furthermore, except for trivial cases, no representation can guarantee Odds Equality fairness for any two different tasks, while allowing accurate label predictions for both. While some of our conclusions are intuitive, we formulate (and prove) crisp statements of such impossibilities, often contrasting impressions conveyed by many recent works on fair representations.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2021.

Builds on

9 of 16 references.

References · 9

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
  3. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
  4. 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
  5. 2019Flexibly Fair Representation Learning by Disentanglementcited by 196
  6. 2015Censoring Representations with an Adversarycited by 191
  7. 2017Data Decisions and Theoretical Implications when Adversarially Learning Fair Representationscited by 165
  8. 2018Learning Controllable Fair Representationscited by 83
  9. 2019Learning Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 4; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

10 papers.