mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Multi-Group Fairness Evaluation via Conditional Value-at-Risk Testing

arXiv 2312.03867 ↗First posted 6 Dec 2023cs.LG cs.CY cs.ITcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine learning (ML) models used in prediction and classification tasks may display performance disparities across population groups determined by sensitive attributes (e.g., race, sex, age). We consider the problem of evaluating the performance of a fixed ML model across population groups defined by multiple sensitive attributes (e.g., race and sex and age). Here, the sample complexity for estimating the worst-case performance gap across groups (e.g., the largest difference in error rates) increases exponentially with the number of group-denoting sensitive attributes. To address this issue, we propose an approach to test for performance disparities based on Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR). By allowing a small probabilistic slack on the groups over which a model has approximately equal performance, we show that the sample complexity required for discovering performance violations is reduced exponentially to be at most upper bounded by the square root of the number of groups. As a byproduct of our analysis, when the groups are weighted by a specific prior distribution, we show that R'enyi entropy of order 2/3 of the prior distribution captures the sample complexity of the proposed CVaR test algorithm. Finally, we also show that there exists a non-i.i.d. data collection strategy that results in a sample complexity independent of the number of groups.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Dec 2023.

Builds on

16 of 45 references.

References · 16

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
  2. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
  3. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 587
  4. 2017On Fairness and Calibrationcited by 406
  5. 2017Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairnesscited by 384
  6. 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 364
  7. 2018An Intersectional Definition of Fairnesscited by 127
  8. 2022Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 125
  9. 2019Fairness risk measurescited by 85
  10. 2018An Empirical Study of Rich Subgroup Fairness for Machine Learningcited by 81
  11. 2022Towards Intersectionality in Machine Learning: Including More Identities, Handling Underrepresentation, and Performing Evaluationcited by 59
  12. 2019R'enyi Fair Inferencecited by 33
4 more
  1. 2021A Stochastic Optimization Framework for Fair Risk Minimizationcited by 26
  2. 2015Faster Algorithms for Testing under Conditional Samplingcited by 7
  3. 2023A Model-Based Method for Minimizing CVaR and Beyondcited by 5
  4. 2022Fair Wrapping for Black-box Predictionscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

3 papers.