mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

How Far Can Fairness Constraints Help Recover From Biased Data?

arXiv 2312.10396 ↗First posted 16 Dec 2023cs.LG cs.AIcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A general belief in fair classification is that fairness constraints incur a trade-off with accuracy, which biased data may worsen. Contrary to this belief, Blum & Stangl (2019) show that fair classification with equal opportunity constraints even on extremely biased data can recover optimally accurate and fair classifiers on the original data distribution. Their result is interesting because it demonstrates that fairness constraints can implicitly rectify data bias and simultaneously overcome a perceived fairness-accuracy trade-off. Their data bias model simulates under-representation and label bias in underprivileged population, and they show the above result on a stylized data distribution with i.i.d. label noise, under simple conditions on the data distribution and bias parameters. We propose a general approach to extend the result of Blum & Stangl (2019) to different fairness constraints, data bias models, data distributions, and hypothesis classes. We strengthen their result, and extend it to the case when their stylized distribution has labels with Massart noise instead of i.i.d. noise. We prove a similar recovery result for arbitrary data distributions using fair reject option classifiers. We further generalize it to arbitrary data distributions and arbitrary hypothesis classes, i.e., we prove that for any data distribution, if the optimally accurate classifier in a given hypothesis class is fair and robust, then it can be recovered through fair classification with equal opportunity constraints on the biased distribution whenever the bias parameters satisfy certain simple conditions. Finally, we show applications of our technique to time-varying data bias in classification and fair machine learning pipelines.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Dec 2023.

Builds on

24 of 45 references.

References · 24

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  3. 2017Predict Responsibly: Improving Fairness and Accuracy by Learning to Defercited by 228
  4. 2019Identifying and Correcting Label Bias in Machine Learningcited by 146
  5. 2020Fair Classification with Group-Dependent Label Noisecited by 67
  6. 2021Optimal strategies for reject option classifierscited by 61
  7. 2019Leveraging Labeled and Unlabeled Data for Consistent Fair Binary Classificationcited by 60
  8. 2019Recovering from Biased Data: Can Fairness Constraints Improve Accuracy?cited by 50
  9. 2022Causal Fairness Analysiscited by 42
  10. 2019Noise-tolerant fair classificationcited by 40
  11. 2018Fairness Through Causal Awareness: Learning Latent-Variable Models for Biased Datacited by 39
  12. 2020Fairness Evaluation in Presence of Biased Noisy Labelscited by 38
12 more
  1. 2021Selective Regression Under Fairness Criteriacited by 34
  2. 2021Classification with abstention but without disparitiescited by 27
  3. 2020Does enforcing fairness mitigate biases caused by subpopulation shift?cited by 25
  4. 2022Bayes-Optimal Classifiers under Group Fairnesscited by 24
  5. 2020Ensuring Fairness under Prior Probability Shiftscited by 16
  6. 2022Fair Bayes-Optimal Classifiers Under Predictive Paritycited by 16
  7. 2021Through the Data Management Lens: Experimental Analysis and Evaluation of Fair Classificationcited by 13
  8. 2022A Sandbox Tool to Bias(Stress)-Test Fairness Algorithmscited by 12
  9. 2022Consistent Range Approximation for Fair Predictive Modelingcited by 7
  10. 2023When Fair Classification Meets Noisy Protected Attributescited by 6
  11. 2023On the Vulnerability of Fairness Constrained Learning to Malicious Noisecited by 3
  12. 2019Quantifying Infra-Marginality and Its Trade-off with Group Fairnesscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

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

5 papers.