mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

A Survey on Preserving Fairness Guarantees in Changing Environments

arXiv 2211.07530 ↗First posted 14 Nov 2022cs.LG cs.CYcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Human lives are increasingly being affected by the outcomes of automated decision-making systems and it is essential for the latter to be, not only accurate, but also fair. The literature of algorithmic fairness has grown considerably over the last decade, where most of the approaches are evaluated under the strong assumption that the train and test samples are independently and identically drawn from the same underlying distribution. However, in practice, dissimilarity between the training and deployment environments exists, which compromises the performance of the decision-making algorithm as well as its fairness guarantees in the deployment data. There is an emergent research line that studies how to preserve fairness guarantees when the data generating processes differ between the source (train) and target (test) domains, which is growing remarkably. With this survey, we aim to provide a wide and unifying overview on the topic. For such purpose, we propose a taxonomy of the existing approaches for fair classification under distribution shift, highlight benchmarking alternatives, point out the relation with other similar research fields and eventually, identify future venues of research.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 76 of its 138 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Nov 2022.

Builds on

76 of 138 references.

References · 76

  1. 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,592
  2. 2020FixMatch: Simplifying Semi-Supervised Learning with Consistency and Confidencecited by 2,080
  3. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  4. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,928
  5. 2020WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shiftscited by 1,366
  6. 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,304
  7. 2019A Comprehensive Survey on Transfer Learningcited by 1,154
  8. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  9. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
  10. 2018Recognition in Terra Incognitacited by 655
  11. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
  12. 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 443
38 more
  1. 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 402
  2. 2018Confounding variables can degrade generalization performance of radiological deep learning modelscited by 374
  3. 2016Fairness Beyond Disparate Treatment & Disparate Impact: Learning Classification without Disparate Mistreatmentcited by 368
  4. 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
  5. 2015The Variational Fair Autoencodercited by 223
  6. 2018Delayed Impact of Fair Machine Learningcited by 183
  7. 2018Learning Gender-Neutral Word Embeddingscited by 169
  8. 2020CheXclusion: Fairness gaps in deep chest X-ray classifierscited by 153
  9. 2017No Classification without Representation: Assessing Geodiversity Issues in Open Data Sets for the Developing Worldcited by 152
  10. 2019Identifying and Correcting Label Bias in Machine Learningcited by 146
  11. 2019MIMIC-Extract: A Data Extraction, Preprocessing, and Representation Pipeline for MIMIC-IIIcited by 121
  12. 201850 Years of Test (Un)fairness: Lessons for Machine Learningcited by 101
  13. 2018Understanding the Origins of Bias in Word Embeddingscited by 90
  14. 2020Fairness-aware Agnostic Federated Learningcited by 87
  15. 2014Automated Experiments on Ad Privacy Settings: A Tale of Opacity, Choice, and Discriminationcited by 83
  16. 2020Why Fairness Cannot Be Automated: Bridging the Gap Between EU Non-Discrimination Law and AIcited by 81
  17. 2020Robust Optimization for Fairness with Noisy Protected Groupscited by 78
  18. 2021Towards Long-term Fairness in Recommendationcited by 77
  19. 2019Training individually fair ML models with Sensitive Subspace Robustnesscited by 73
  20. 2016Satisfying Real-world Goals with Dataset Constraintscited by 68
  21. 2020Fair Classification with Group-Dependent Label Noisecited by 67
  22. 2020How Do Fair Decisions Fare in Long-term Qualification?cited by 59
  23. 2020Robust Fairness under Covariate Shiftcited by 58
  24. 2020Fairness Through Robustness: Investigating Robustness Disparity in Deep Learningcited by 55
  25. 2021Causally motivated Shortcut Removal Using Auxiliary Labelscited by 55
  26. 2020FR-Train: A Mutual Information-Based Approach to Fair and Robust Trainingcited by 52
  27. 2018Residual Unfairness in Fair Machine Learning from Prejudiced Datacited by 49
  28. 2019Equalized odds postprocessing under imperfect group informationcited by 48
  29. 2020Exacerbating Algorithmic Bias through Fairness Attackscited by 47
  30. 2017A Short-term Intervention for Long-term Fairness in the Labor Marketcited by 44
  31. 2020A Distributionally Robust Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 43
  32. 2019Noise-tolerant fair classificationcited by 40
  33. 2020Fairness Evaluation in Presence of Biased Noisy Labelscited by 38
  34. 2021FARF: A Fair and Adaptive Random Forests Classifiercited by 37
  35. 2018From Fair Decision Making to Social Equalitycited by 36
  36. 2019Transfer of Machine Learning Fairness across Domainscited by 36
  37. 2020Ensuring Fairness Beyond the Training Datacited by 35
  38. 2020Fairness and Robustness in Invariant Learning: A Case Study in Toxicity Classificationcited by 32

50 most cited of 76 All 76 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year

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

2 papers.