mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Information-Theoretic Testing and Debugging of Fairness Defects in Deep Neural Networks

arXiv 2304.04199 ↗First posted 9 Apr 2023cs.SE cs.LGcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The deep feedforward neural networks (DNNs) are increasingly deployed in socioeconomic critical decision support software systems. DNNs are exceptionally good at finding minimal, sufficient statistical patterns within their training data. Consequently, DNNs may learn to encode decisions -- amplifying existing biases or introducing new ones -- that may disadvantage protected individuals/groups and may stand to violate legal protections. While the existing search based software testing approaches have been effective in discovering fairness defects, they do not supplement these defects with debugging aids -- such as severity and causal explanations -- crucial to help developers triage and decide on the next course of action. Can we measure the severity of fairness defects in DNNs? Are these defects symptomatic of improper training or they merely reflect biases present in the training data? To answer such questions, we present DICE: an information-theoretic testing and debugging framework to discover and localize fairness defects in DNNs. The key goal of DICE is to assist software developers in triaging fairness defects by ordering them by their severity. Towards this goal, we quantify fairness in terms of protected information (in bits) used in decision making. A quantitative view of fairness defects not only helps in ordering these defects, our empirical evaluation shows that it improves the search efficiency due to resulting smoothness of the search space. Guided by the quantitative fairness, we present a causal debugging framework to localize inadequately trained layers and neurons responsible for fairness defects. Our experiments over ten DNNs, developed for socially critical tasks, show that DICE efficiently characterizes the amounts of discrimination, effectively generates discriminatory instances, and localizes layers/neurons with significant biases.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Apr 2023.

Builds on

13 of 58 references.

References · 13

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
  3. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
  4. 2017Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discriminationcited by 123
  5. 2021Bias in Machine Learning Software: Why? How? What to do?cited by 92
  6. 2018Automated Directed Fairness Testingcited by 77
  7. 2021NeuronFair: Interpretable White-Box Fairness Testing through Biased Neuron Identificationcited by 42
  8. 2018Finding Faster Configurations using FLASHcited by 32
  9. 2022Fairness-aware Configuration of Machine Learning Librariescited by 28
  10. 2018Automated Test Generation to Detect Individual Discrimination in AI Modelscited by 21
  11. 2022Algorithmic Fairness and Vertical Equity: Income Fairness with IRS Tax Audit Modelscited by 12
  12. 2022Metamorphic Testing and Debugging of Tax Preparation Softwarecited by 7
1 more
  1. 2021QFuzz: Quantitative Fuzzing for Side Channelscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 6; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

10 papers.