mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Fairness via In-Processing in the Over-parameterized Regime: A Cautionary Tale

arXiv 2206.14853 ↗First posted 29 Jun 2022cs.LG cs.CYcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The success of DNNs is driven by the counter-intuitive ability of over-parameterized networks to generalize, even when they perfectly fit the training data. In practice, test error often continues to decrease with increasing over-parameterization, referred to as double descent. This allows practitioners to instantiate large models without having to worry about over-fitting. Despite its benefits, however, prior work has shown that over-parameterization can exacerbate bias against minority subgroups. Several fairness-constrained DNN training methods have been proposed to address this concern. Here, we critically examine MinDiff, a fairness-constrained training procedure implemented within TensorFlow's Responsible AI Toolkit, that aims to achieve Equality of Opportunity. We show that although MinDiff improves fairness for under-parameterized models, it is likely to be ineffective in the over-parameterized regime. This is because an overfit model with zero training loss is trivially group-wise fair on training data, creating an "illusion of fairness," thus turning off the MinDiff optimization (this will apply to any disparity-based measures which care about errors or accuracy. It won't apply to demographic parity). Within specified fairness constraints, under-parameterized MinDiff models can even have lower error compared to their over-parameterized counterparts (despite baseline over-parameterized models having lower error). We further show that MinDiff optimization is very sensitive to choice of batch size in the under-parameterized regime. Thus, fair model training using MinDiff requires time-consuming hyper-parameter searches. Finally, we suggest using previously proposed regularization techniques, viz. L2, early stopping and flooding in conjunction with MinDiff to train fair over-parameterized models.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jun 2022.

Builds on

36 of 63 references.

References · 36

  1. 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,679
  2. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  3. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  4. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
  5. 2019Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurtcited by 667
  6. 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
  7. 2020Long-tail learning via logit adjustmentcited by 605
  8. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
  9. 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 363
  10. 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
  11. 2020An Investigation of Why Overparameterization Exacerbates Spurious Correlationscited by 310
  12. 2019Towards Fairness in Visual Recognition: Effective Strategies for Bias Mitigationcited by 252
24 more
  1. 2020Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted Learningcited by 251
  2. 2018Empirical Risk Minimization under Fairness Constraintscited by 226
  3. 2018Fairness of Exposure in Rankingscited by 189
  4. 2021On the Origin of Implicit Regularization in Stochastic Gradient Descentcited by 183
  5. 2017Data Decisions and Theoretical Implications when Adversarially Learning Fair Representationscited by 165
  6. 2019Gradient Descent with Early Stopping is Provably Robust to Label Noise for Overparameterized Neural Networkscited by 158
  7. 2020Minimax Pareto Fairness: A Multi Objective Perspectivecited by 152
  8. 2019Mitigate Bias in Face Recognition using Skewness-Aware Reinforcement Learningcited by 145
  9. 2020Implicit Gradient Regularizationcited by 145
  10. 2021Disparities in Dermatology AI: Assessments Using Diverse Clinical Imagescited by 132
  11. 2019Wasserstein Fair Classificationcited by 131
  12. 2018Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankingscited by 124
  13. 2018Achieving Fairness through Adversarial Learning: an Application to Recidivism Predictioncited by 77
  14. 2019Putting Fairness Principles into Practice: Challenges, Metrics, and Improvementscited by 70
  15. 2020Do We Need Zero Training Loss After Achieving Zero Training Error?cited by 61
  16. 2019Leveraging Labeled and Unlabeled Data for Consistent Fair Binary Classificationcited by 60
  17. 2018FNNC: Achieving Fairness through Neural Networkscited by 43
  18. 2019Toward a better trade-off between performance and fairness with kernel-based distribution matchingcited by 36
  19. 2020Intra-Processing Methods for Debiasing Neural Networkscited by 27
  20. 2016Reviving Threshold-Moving: a Simple Plug-in Bagging Ensemble for Binary and Multiclass Imbalanced Datacited by 23
  21. 2021Technical Challenges for Training Fair Neural Networkscited by 20
  22. 2021A Near-Optimal Algorithm for Debiasing Trained Machine Learning Modelscited by 19
  23. 2021The Effect of Model Size on Worst-Group Generalizationcited by 4
  24. 2022How does overparametrization affect performance on minority groups?cited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 3.

4 papers.