mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Measuring Fairness of Text Classifiers via Prediction Sensitivity

arXiv 2203.08670 ↗First posted 16 Mar 2022cs.LG cs.CYcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

With the rapid growth in language processing applications, fairness has emerged as an important consideration in data-driven solutions. Although various fairness definitions have been explored in the recent literature, there is lack of consensus on which metrics most accurately reflect the fairness of a system. In this work, we propose a new formulation : ACCUMULATED PREDICTION SENSITIVITY, which measures fairness in machine learning models based on the model's prediction sensitivity to perturbations in input features. The metric attempts to quantify the extent to which a single prediction depends on a protected attribute, where the protected attribute encodes the membership status of an individual in a protected group. We show that the metric can be theoretically linked with a specific notion of group fairness (statistical parity) and individual fairness. It also correlates well with humans' perception of fairness. We conduct experiments on two text classification datasets : JIGSAW TOXICITY, and BIAS IN BIOS, and evaluate the correlations between metrics and manual annotations on whether the model produced a fair outcome. We observe that the proposed fairness metric based on prediction sensitivity is statistically significantly more correlated with human annotation than the existing counterfactual fairness metric.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Mar 2022.

Builds on

27 of 44 references.

References · 27

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  3. 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,304
  4. 2020Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPcited by 951
  5. 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 894
  6. 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
  7. 2020CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Modelscited by 703
  8. 2019The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generationcited by 540
  9. 2021BOLD: Dataset and Metrics for Measuring Biases in Open-Ended Language Generationcited by 410
  10. 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 402
  11. 2019Bias in Bios: A Case Study of Semantic Representation Bias in a High-Stakes Settingcited by 346
  12. 2019Measurement and Fairnesscited by 299
15 more
  1. 2019Mitigating Gender Bias in Natural Language Processing: Literature Reviewcited by 287
  2. 2021Societal Biases in Language Generation: Progress and Challengescited by 201
  3. 2018Counterfactual Fairness in Text Classification through Robustnesscited by 150
  4. 2019Black is to Criminal as Caucasian is to Police: Detecting and Removing Multiclass Bias in Word Embeddingscited by 146
  5. 2020Explaining Black Box Predictions and Unveiling Data Artifacts through Influence Functionscited by 144
  6. 2018A Unified Approach to Quantifying Algorithmic Unfairness: Measuring Individual & Group Unfairness via Inequality Indicescited by 97
  7. 2018An Empirical Study of Rich Subgroup Fairness for Machine Learningcited by 81
  8. 2020Multi-Dimensional Gender Bias Classificationcited by 80
  9. 2017From Parity to Preference-based Notions of Fairness in Classificationcited by 60
  10. 2021Does Robustness Improve Fairness? Approaching Fairness with Word Substitution Robustness Methods for Text Classificationcited by 20
  11. 2020Is Your Classifier Actually Biased? Measuring Fairness under Uncertainty with Bernstein Boundscited by 13
  12. 2020LOGAN: Local Group Bias Detection by Clusteringcited by 9
  13. 2019On evaluating CNN representations for low resource medical image classificationcited by 2
  14. 2020Towards a Measure of Individual Fairness for Deep Learningcited by 2
  15. 2020Towards Auditability for Fairness in Deep Learningcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 2; 2025: 1.

5 papers.