Doubly Constrained Fair Clustering
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The remarkable attention which fair clustering has received in the last few years has resulted in a significant number of different notions of fairness. Despite the fact that these notions are well-justified, they are often motivated and studied in a disjoint manner where one fairness desideratum is considered exclusively in isolation from the others. This leaves the understanding of the relations between different fairness notions as an important open problem in fair clustering. In this paper, we take the first step in this direction. Specifically, we consider the two most prominent demographic representation fairness notions in clustering: (1) Group Fairness (GF), where the different demographic groups are supposed to have close to population-level representation in each cluster and (2) Diversity in Center Selection (DS), where the selected centers are supposed to have close to population-level representation of each group. We show that given a constant approximation algorithm for one constraint (GF or DS only) we can obtain a constant approximation solution that satisfies both constraints simultaneously. Interestingly, we prove that any given solution that satisfies the GF constraint can always be post-processed at a bounded degradation to the clustering cost to additionally satisfy the DS constraint while the reverse is not true. Furthermore, we show that both GF and DS are incompatible (having an empty feasibility set in the worst case) with a collection of other distance-based fairness notions. Finally, we carry experiments to validate our theoretical findings.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 May 2023.
Builds on
31 of 43 references.
References · 31
- 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
- 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
- 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
- 2017Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Artcited by 315
- 2018Fair Clustering Through Fairletscited by 176
- 2019Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: Evaluating Claims and Practicescited by 170
- 2019Fair Algorithms for Clusteringcited by 98
- 2019Guarantees for Spectral Clustering with Fairness Constraintscited by 72
- 2019Proportionally Fair Clusteringcited by 69
- 2019Fair k-Center Clustering for Data Summarizationcited by 65
- 2020Individual Fairness for k-Clusteringcited by 56
- 2019Clustering without Over-Representationcited by 50
19 more
- 2018On the cost of essentially fair clusteringscited by 44
- 2018Fairness Under Compositioncited by 43
- 2020Fair clustering via equitable group representationscited by 43
- 2020Probabilistic Fair Clusteringcited by 28
- 2020Fair Correlation Clusteringcited by 27
- 2019A Center in Your Neighborhood: Fairness in Facility Locationcited by 26
- 2020A Pairwise Fair and Community-preserving Approach to k-Center Clusteringcited by 26
- 2020Fair Hierarchical Clusteringcited by 25
- 2021Fair Clustering Under a Bounded Costcited by 21
- 2020A Notion of Individual Fairness for Clusteringcited by 20
- 2021A New Notion of Individually Fair Clustering: α-Equitable k-Centercited by 18
- 2021Diversity-aware k-median : Clustering with fair center representationcited by 16
- 2022Scalable Spectral Clustering with Group Fairness Constraintscited by 16
- 2020Fair Algorithms for Hierarchical Agglomerative Clusteringcited by 10
- 2021Consistency of Constrained Spectral Clustering under Graph Induced Fair Planted Partitionscited by 10
- 2022Individual Preference Stability for Clusteringcited by 8
- 2022Improved Approximation for Fair Correlation Clusteringcited by 6
- 2022Generalized Reductions: Making any Hierarchical Clustering Fair and Balanced with Low Costcited by 4
- 2022Fair Range k-centercited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 4; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
9 papers.
- 2023Proportional Fairness in Clustering: A Social Choice Perspectivecited by 12
- 2024Robust Fair Clustering with Group Membership Uncertainty Setscited by 1
- 2024Fair Clustering: Critique, Caveats, and Future Directionscited by 1
- 2024The Fairness-Quality Trade-off in Clusteringcited by 1
- 2025A Computational Approach to Improving Fairness in K-means Clusteringcited by 1
- 2026Constant-Factor Approximations for Doubly Constrained Fair k-Center, k-Median and k-Meanscited by 1
- 2024Efficient k-means with Individual Fairness via Exponential Tiltingcited by 0
- 2025Welfare-Centric Clusteringcited by 0
- 2026SubQuad: Near-Quadratic-Free Structure Inference with Distribution-Balanced Objectives in Adaptive Receptor frameworkcited by 0
- 2026Constant-Factor Approximations for Doubly Constrained Fair k-Center, k-Median and k-Means17 Apr 2026
- 2026SubQuad: Near-Quadratic-Free Structure Inference with Distribution-Balanced Objectives in Adaptive Receptor framework19 Feb 2026
- 2025Welfare-Centric Clustering14 Aug 2025
- 2025A Computational Approach to Improving Fairness in K-means Clustering29 May 2025
- 2024The Fairness-Quality Trade-off in Clustering19 Aug 2024
- 2024Efficient k-means with Individual Fairness via Exponential Tilting24 Jun 2024
- 2024Fair Clustering: Critique, Caveats, and Future Directions22 Jun 2024
- 2024Robust Fair Clustering with Group Membership Uncertainty Sets2 Jun 2024
- 2023Proportional Fairness in Clustering: A Social Choice Perspective27 Oct 2023