mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Multi-dimensional discrimination in Law and Machine Learning -- A comparative overview

arXiv 2302.05995 ↗First posted 12 Feb 2023cs.LG cs.CYcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

AI-driven decision-making can lead to discrimination against certain individuals or social groups based on protected characteristics/attributes such as race, gender, or age. The domain of fairness-aware machine learning focuses on methods and algorithms for understanding, mitigating, and accounting for bias in AI/ML models. Still, thus far, the vast majority of the proposed methods assess fairness based on a single protected attribute, e.g. only gender or race. In reality, though, human identities are multi-dimensional, and discrimination can occur based on more than one protected characteristic, leading to the so-called ``multi-dimensional discrimination'' or ``multi-dimensional fairness'' problem. While well-elaborated in legal literature, the multi-dimensionality of discrimination is less explored in the machine learning community. Recent approaches in this direction mainly follow the so-called intersectional fairness definition from the legal domain, whereas other notions like additive and sequential discrimination are less studied or not considered thus far. In this work, we overview the different definitions of multi-dimensional discrimination/fairness in the legal domain as well as how they have been transferred/ operationalized (if) in the fairness-aware machine learning domain. By juxtaposing these two domains, we draw the connections, identify the limitations, and point out open research directions.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 99 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2023.

Builds on

26 of 99 references.

References · 26

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
  3. 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 443
  4. 2017On Fairness and Calibrationcited by 406
  5. 2017Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairnesscited by 381
  6. 2019Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: Evaluating Claims and Practicescited by 170
  7. 2018An Intersectional Definition of Fairnesscited by 126
  8. 2019Towards a Critical Race Methodology in Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 124
  9. 2016Fairness in Reinforcement Learningcited by 93
  10. 2021A Survey on Bias in Visual Datasetscited by 84
  11. 2018An Empirical Study of Rich Subgroup Fairness for Machine Learningcited by 81
  12. 2020Why Fairness Cannot Be Automated: Bridging the Gap Between EU Non-Discrimination Law and AIcited by 81
14 more
  1. 2021Subgroup Generalization and Fairness of Graph Neural Networkscited by 69
  2. 2021Fairness in Rankings and Recommendations: An Overviewcited by 62
  3. 2020How Do Fair Decisions Fare in Long-term Qualification?cited by 59
  4. 2020"What We Can't Measure, We Can't Understand": Challenges to Demographic Data Procurement in the Pursuit of Fairnesscited by 56
  5. 2019AdaFair: Cumulative Fairness Adaptive Boostingcited by 45
  6. 2021Characterizing Intersectional Group Fairness with Worst-Case Comparisonscited by 42
  7. 2022On Learning Fairness and Accuracy on Multiple Subgroupscited by 31
  8. 2018Bayesian Modeling of Intersectional Fairness: The Variance of Biascited by 23
  9. 2017Fair Pipelinescited by 21
  10. 2020Causal intersectionality for fair rankingcited by 12
  11. 2022Fairness Implications of Encoding Protected Categorical Attributescited by 7
  12. 2022Using sensitive data to prevent discrimination by artificial intelligence: Does the GDPR need a new exception?cited by 7
  13. 2021Multi-fairness under class-imbalancecited by 4
  14. 2021Legal perspective on possible fairness measures - A legal discussion using the example of hiring decisions (preprint)cited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 5; 2025: 7.

15 papers.

Sort: