mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Monitoring Algorithmic Fairness under Partial Observations

arXiv 2308.00341 ↗First posted 1 Aug 2023cs.AI cs.LGcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As AI and machine-learned software are used increasingly for making decisions that affect humans, it is imperative that they remain fair and unbiased in their decisions. To complement design-time bias mitigation measures, runtime verification techniques have been introduced recently to monitor the algorithmic fairness of deployed systems. Previous monitoring techniques assume full observability of the states of the (unknown) monitored system. Moreover, they can monitor only fairness properties that are specified as arithmetic expressions over the probabilities of different events. In this work, we extend fairness monitoring to systems modeled as partially observed Markov chains (POMC), and to specifications containing arithmetic expressions over the expected values of numerical functions on event sequences. The only assumptions we make are that the underlying POMC is aperiodic and starts in the stationary distribution, with a bound on its mixing time being known. These assumptions enable us to estimate a given property for the entire distribution of possible executions of the monitored POMC, by observing only a single execution. Our monitors observe a long run of the system and, after each new observation, output updated PAC-estimates of how fair or biased the system is. The monitors are computationally lightweight and, using a prototype implementation, we demonstrate their effectiveness on several real-world examples.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Aug 2023.

Builds on

29 of 63 references.

References · 29

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  3. 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
  4. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  5. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
  6. 2017Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairnesscited by 381
  7. 2019The What-If Tool: Interactive Probing of Machine Learning Modelscited by 207
  8. 2018Delayed Impact of Fair Machine Learningcited by 183
  9. 2020CheXclusion: Fairness gaps in deep chest X-ray classifierscited by 153
  10. 2017Runaway Feedback Loops in Predictive Policingcited by 97
  11. 2018Differentially Private Fair Learningcited by 76
  12. 2018iFair: Learning Individually Fair Data Representations for Algorithmic Decision Makingcited by 64
17 more
  1. 2020Verifying Individual Fairness in Machine Learning Modelscited by 49
  2. 2019Average Individual Fairness: Algorithms, Generalization and Experimentscited by 46
  3. 2018Probabilistic Verification of Fairness Properties via Concentrationcited by 45
  4. 2021Fair Normalizing Flowscited by 38
  5. 2019PAC Statistical Model Checking for Markov Decision Processes and Stochastic Gamescited by 30
  6. 2020Justicia: A Stochastic SAT Approach to Formally Verify Fairnesscited by 25
  7. 2021Certifying Robustness to Programmable Data Bias in Decision Treescited by 21
  8. 2021Fairness-Aware PAC Learning from Corrupted Datacited by 18
  9. 2021Probabilistic Verification of Neural Networks Against Group Fairnesscited by 17
  10. 2023Runtime Monitoring of Dynamic Fairness Propertiescited by 17
  11. 2021Algorithmic Fairness Verification with Graphical Modelscited by 16
  12. 2017Real-time Stream-based Monitoringcited by 13
  13. 2023Monitoring Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 8
  14. 2019Monitoring Event Frequenciescited by 5
  15. 2021Quantitative and Approximate Monitoringcited by 3
  16. 2021Runtime Monitoring for Markov Decision Processescited by 2
  17. 2021Towards Probabilistic Session-Type Monitoringcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 4; 2026: 1.

7 papers.