Locating disparities in machine learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning can provide predictions with disparate outcomes, in which subgroups of the population (e.g., defined by age, gender, or other sensitive attributes) are systematically disadvantaged. In order to comply with upcoming legislation, practitioners need to locate such disparate outcomes. However, previous literature typically detects disparities through statistical procedures for when the sensitive attribute is specified a priori. This limits applicability in real-world settings where datasets are high dimensional and, on top of that, sensitive attributes may be unknown. As a remedy, we propose a data-driven framework called Automatic Location of Disparities (ALD) which aims at locating disparities in machine learning. ALD meets several demands from industry: ALD (1) is applicable to arbitrary machine learning classifiers; (2) operates on different definitions of disparities (e.g., statistical parity or equalized odds); and (3) deals with both categorical and continuous predictors even if disparities arise from complex and multi-way interactions known as intersectionality (e. g., age above 60 and female). ALD produces interpretable audit reports as output. We demonstrate the effectiveness of ALD based on both synthetic and real-world datasets. As a result, we empower practitioners to effectively locate and mitigate disparities in machine learning algorithms, conduct algorithmic audits, and protect individuals from discrimination.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 81 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Aug 2022.
Builds on
15 of 81 references.
References · 15
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 804
- 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 672
- 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 586
- 2017On Fairness and Calibrationcited by 406
- 2017Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairnesscited by 384
- 2018A comparative study of fairness-enhancing interventions in machine learningcited by 208
- 2019Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: Evaluating Claims and Practicescited by 174
- 2019Discrimination in the Age of Algorithmscited by 51
- 2019FlipTest: Fairness Testing via Optimal Transportcited by 51
- 2019Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: An Excursion Through the Lens of Causalitycited by 33
- 2022Algorithmic Fairness in Business Analytics: Directions for Research and Practicecited by 18
3 more
- 2016Identifying Significant Predictive Bias in Classifierscited by 15
- 2017Fairer and more accurate, but for whom?cited by 13
- 2016On the (im)possibility of fairnesscited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.
4 papers.
- 2023Statistical Inference for Fairness Auditingcited by 20
- 2025"Who experiences large model decay and why?" A Hierarchical Framework for Diagnosing Heterogeneous Performance Driftcited by 1
- 2023Machine Learning Applications In Healthcare: The State Of Knowledge and Future Directionscited by 0
- 2024Connecting Algorithmic Fairness to Quality Dimensions in Machine Learning in Official Statistics and Survey Productioncited by 0
- 2025"Who experiences large model decay and why?" A Hierarchical Framework for Diagnosing Heterogeneous Performance Drift31 May 2025
- 2024Connecting Algorithmic Fairness to Quality Dimensions in Machine Learning in Official Statistics and Survey Production14 Feb 2024
- 2023Machine Learning Applications In Healthcare: The State Of Knowledge and Future Directions26 Jul 2023
- 2023Statistical Inference for Fairness Auditing5 May 2023