# Cascaded Debiasing: Studying the Cumulative Effect of Multiple Fairness-Enhancing Interventions

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.03734 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03734/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 23 of its 47 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Feb 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02413/) (2016)
- [Certifying and removing disparate impact](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.3756/) (2014)
- [A Reductions Approach to Fair Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.02453/) (2018)
- [Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.05807/) (2016)
- [Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.04884/) (2021)
- [On Fairness and Calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.02012/) (2017)
- [Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.05144/) (2017)
- [AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.01943/) (2018)
- [Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.05239/) (2018)
- [Word Embeddings Quantify 100 Years of Gender and Ethnic Stereotypes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.08412/) (2017)
- [Fair Regression: Quantitative Definitions and Reduction-based Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.12843/) (2019)
- [A Convex Framework for Fair Regression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.02409/) (2017)
- [It's COMPASlicated: The Messy Relationship between RAI Datasets and Algorithmic Fairness Benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.05498/) (2021)
- [Fair Preprocessing: Towards Understanding Compositional Fairness of Data Transformers in Machine Learning Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.06054/) (2021)
- [Exploring Author Gender in Book Rating and Recommendation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.07586/) (2018)
- [Understanding Unequal Gender Classification Accuracy from Face Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.00099/) (2018)
- [Individual Fairness in Pipelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.05167/) (2020)
- [Fair Pipelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.00391/) (2017)
- [The Price of Local Fairness in Multistage Selection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.06613/) (2019)
- [WordBias: An Interactive Visual Tool for Discovering Intersectional Biases Encoded in Word Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03598/) (2021)
- [Statistical Equity: A Fairness Classification Objective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.07293/) (2020)
- [Measuring Social Biases of Crowd Workers using Counterfactual Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.02028/) (2020)
- [FairAutoML: Embracing Unfairness Mitigation in AutoML](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.06495/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.07068/) (2022)
- [D-BIAS: A Causality-Based Human-in-the-Loop System for Tackling Algorithmic Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.05126/) (2022)
- [Towards Fair and Explainable AI using a Human-Centered AI Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.07427/) (2023)
- [Dataopsy: Scalable and Fluid Visual Exploration using Aggregate Query Sculpting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.02764/) (2023)
- [Bias in the Tails: How Name-conditioned Evaluative Framing in Resume Summaries Destabilizes LLM-based Hiring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.19984/) (2026)
- [FairGridSearch: A Framework to Compare Fairness-Enhancing Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.02183/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Understanding the cumulative effect of multiple fairness enhancing interventions at different stages of the machine learning (ML) pipeline is a critical and underexplored facet of the fairness literature. Such knowledge can be valuable to data scientists/ML practitioners in designing fair ML pipelines. This paper takes the first step in exploring this area by undertaking an extensive empirical study comprising 60 combinations of interventions, 9 fairness metrics, 2 utility metrics (Accuracy and F1 Score) across 4 benchmark datasets. We quantitatively analyze the experimental data to measure the impact of multiple interventions on fairness, utility and population groups. We found that applying multiple interventions results in better fairness and lower utility than individual interventions on aggregate. However, adding more interventions do no always result in better fairness or worse utility. The likelihood of achieving high performance (F1 Score) along with high fairness increases with larger number of interventions. On the downside, we found that fairness-enhancing interventions can negatively impact different population groups, especially the privileged group. This study highlights the need for new fairness metrics that account for the impact on different population groups apart from just the disparity between groups. Lastly, we offer a list of combinations of interventions that perform best for different fairness and utility metrics to aid the design of fair ML pipelines.