mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Falcon: Fair Active Learning using Multi-armed Bandits

arXiv 2401.12722 ↗First posted 23 Jan 2024cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Biased data can lead to unfair machine learning models, highlighting the importance of embedding fairness at the beginning of data analysis, particularly during dataset curation and labeling. In response, we propose Falcon, a scalable fair active learning framework. Falcon adopts a data-centric approach that improves machine learning model fairness via strategic sample selection. Given a user-specified group fairness measure, Falcon identifies samples from "target groups" (e.g., (attribute=female, label=positive)) that are the most informative for improving fairness. However, a challenge arises since these target groups are defined using ground truth labels that are not available during sample selection. To handle this, we propose a novel trial-and-error method, where we postpone using a sample if the predicted label is different from the expected one and falls outside the target group. We also observe the trade-off that selecting more informative samples results in higher likelihood of postponing due to undesired label prediction, and the optimal balance varies per dataset. We capture the trade-off between informativeness and postpone rate as policies and propose to automatically select the best policy using adversarial multi-armed bandit methods, given their computational efficiency and theoretical guarantees. Experiments show that Falcon significantly outperforms existing fair active learning approaches in terms of fairness and accuracy and is more efficient. In particular, only Falcon supports a proper trade-off between accuracy and fairness where its maximum fairness score is 1.8-4.5x higher than the second-best results.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jan 2024.

Builds on

24 of 67 references.

References · 24

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
  2. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  3. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 672
  4. 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 449
  5. 2017Snorkel: Rapid Training Data Creation with Weak Supervisioncited by 372
  6. 2018AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Biascited by 319
  7. 2019Inherent Tradeoffs in Learning Fair Representationscited by 144
  8. 2018Why Is My Classifier Discriminatory?cited by 143
  9. 2021Data Collection and Quality Challenges in Deep Learning: A Data-Centric AI Perspectivecited by 116
  10. 2020FairBatch: Batch Selection for Model Fairnesscited by 99
  11. 2019Operationalizing Individual Fairness with Pairwise Fair Representationscited by 64
  12. 2017Rotting Banditscited by 57
12 more
  1. 2019Regret Bounds for Batched Banditscited by 49
  2. 2021Sample Selection for Fair and Robust Trainingcited by 48
  3. 2019AdaFair: Cumulative Fairness Adaptive Boostingcited by 45
  4. 2020Active Sampling for Min-Max Fairnesscited by 33
  5. 2020Fair Active Learningcited by 30
  6. 2021Adaptive Sampling for Minimax Fair Classificationcited by 24
  7. 2017BoostClean: Automated Error Detection and Repair for Machine Learningcited by 23
  8. 2021OmniFair: A Declarative System for Model-Agnostic Group Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 18
  9. 2020Slice Tuner: A Selective Data Acquisition Framework for Accurate and Fair Machine Learning Modelscited by 13
  10. 2020Picket: Guarding Against Corrupted Data in Tabular Data during Learning and Inferencecited by 11
  11. 2022Minority Class Oriented Active Learning for Imbalanced Datasetscited by 11
  12. 2022Fair Robust Active Learning by Joint Inconsistencycited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

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

6 papers.