mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Modelling the long-term fairness dynamics of data-driven targeted help on job seekers

arXiv 2208.08881 ↗First posted 17 Aug 2022cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The use of data-driven decision support by public agencies is becoming more widespread and already influences the allocation of public resources. This raises ethical concerns, as it has adversely affected minorities and historically discriminated groups. In this paper, we use an approach that combines statistics and data-driven approaches with dynamical modeling to assess long-term fairness effects of labor market interventions. Specifically, we develop and use a model to investigate the impact of decisions caused by a public employment authority that selectively supports job-seekers through targeted help. The selection of who receives what help is based on a data-driven intervention model that estimates an individual's chances of finding a job in a timely manner and rests upon data that describes a population in which skills relevant to the labor market are unevenly distributed between two groups (e.g., males and females). The intervention model has incomplete access to the individual's actual skills and can augment this with knowledge of the individual's group affiliation, thus using a protected attribute to increase predictive accuracy. We assess this intervention model's dynamics -- especially fairness-related issues and trade-offs between different fairness goals -- over time and compare it to an intervention model that does not use group affiliation as a predictive feature. We conclude that in order to quantify the trade-off correctly and to assess the long-term fairness effects of such a system in the real-world, careful modeling of the surrounding labor market is indispensable.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Aug 2022.

Builds on

14 of 47 references.

References · 14

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
  2. 2018AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Biascited by 319
  3. 2019Differential Privacy Has Disparate Impact on Model Accuracycited by 316
  4. 2018Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?cited by 262
  5. 2018Delayed Impact of Fair Machine Learningcited by 184
  6. 2019On the Apparent Conflict Between Individual and Group Fairnesscited by 126
  7. 2014Automated Experiments on Ad Privacy Settings: A Tale of Opacity, Choice, and Discriminationcited by 83
  8. 2020Why Fairness Cannot Be Automated: Bridging the Gap Between EU Non-Discrimination Law and AIcited by 81
  9. 2019Mathematical Notions vs. Human Perception of Fairness: A Descriptive Approach to Fairness for Machine Learningcited by 57
  10. 2017A Short-term Intervention for Long-term Fairness in the Labor Marketcited by 44
  11. 2018From Fair Decision Making to Social Equalitycited by 36
  12. 2018Downstream Effects of Affirmative Actioncited by 34
2 more
  1. 2019Efficient candidate screening under multiple tests and implications for fairnesscited by 16
  2. 2021How Costly is Noise? Data and Disparities in Consumer Creditcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year

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

2 papers.