mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Fair Classifiers that Abstain without Harm

arXiv 2310.06205 ↗First posted 9 Oct 2023cs.LGcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In critical applications, it is vital for classifiers to defer decision-making to humans. We propose a post-hoc method that makes existing classifiers selectively abstain from predicting certain samples. Our abstaining classifier is incentivized to maintain the original accuracy for each sub-population (i.e. no harm) while achieving a set of group fairness definitions to a user specified degree. To this end, we design an Integer Programming (IP) procedure that assigns abstention decisions for each training sample to satisfy a set of constraints. To generalize the abstaining decisions to test samples, we then train a surrogate model to learn the abstaining decisions based on the IP solutions in an end-to-end manner. We analyze the feasibility of the IP procedure to determine the possible abstention rate for different levels of unfairness tolerance and accuracy constraint for achieving no harm. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to identify the theoretical relationships between the constraint parameters and the required abstention rate. Our theoretical results are important since a high abstention rate is often infeasible in practice due to a lack of human resources. Our framework outperforms existing methods in terms of fairness disparity without sacrificing accuracy at similar abstention rates.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2023.

Builds on

17 of 32 references.

References · 17

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
  3. 2017Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networkscited by 799
  4. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
  5. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
  6. 2017On Fairness and Calibrationcited by 406
  7. 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
  8. 2018AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Biascited by 319
  9. 2020Consistent Estimators for Learning to Defer to an Expertcited by 262
  10. 2017Predict Responsibly: Improving Fairness and Accuracy by Learning to Defercited by 228
  11. 2017Fair Inference On Outcomescited by 143
  12. 2023Who Should Predict? Exact Algorithms For Learning to Defer to Humanscited by 68
5 more
  1. 2018Fairness Through Computationally-Bounded Awarenesscited by 55
  2. 2020Selective Classification Can Magnify Disparities Across Groupscited by 35
  3. 2021Selective Regression Under Fairness Criteriacited by 34
  4. 2018Active Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Makingcited by 27
  5. 2021Classification with abstention but without disparitiescited by 27

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 3.

8 papers.