Fairness Without Harm: An Influence-Guided Active Sampling Approach
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The pursuit of fairness in machine learning (ML), ensuring that the models do not exhibit biases toward protected demographic groups, typically results in a compromise scenario. This compromise can be explained by a Pareto frontier where given certain resources (e.g., data), reducing the fairness violations often comes at the cost of lowering the model accuracy. In this work, we aim to train models that mitigate group fairness disparity without causing harm to model accuracy. Intuitively, acquiring more data is a natural and promising approach to achieve this goal by reaching a better Pareto frontier of the fairness-accuracy tradeoff. The current data acquisition methods, such as fair active learning approaches, typically require annotating sensitive attributes. However, these sensitive attribute annotations should be protected due to privacy and safety concerns. In this paper, we propose a tractable active data sampling algorithm that does not rely on training group annotations, instead only requiring group annotations on a small validation set. Specifically, the algorithm first scores each new example by its influence on fairness and accuracy evaluated on the validation dataset, and then selects a certain number of examples for training. We theoretically analyze how acquiring more data can improve fairness without causing harm, and validate the possibility of our sampling approach in the context of risk disparity. We also provide the upper bound of generalization error and risk disparity as well as the corresponding connections. Extensive experiments on real-world data demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed algorithm. Our code is available at https://github.com/UCSC-REAL/FairnessWithoutHarm.
Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 51 of its 83 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Feb 2024.
Builds on
51 of 83 references.
References · 51
- 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,693
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,741
- 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
- 2016Making Deep Neural Networks Robust to Label Noise: a Loss Correction Approachcited by 665
- 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 587
- 2021Just Train Twice: Improving Group Robustness without Training Group Informationcited by 523
- 2019Does Learning Require Memorization? A Short Tale about a Long Tailcited by 460
- 2017On Fairness and Calibrationcited by 406
- 2019Fair Resource Allocation in Federated Learningcited by 394
- 2022Last Layer Re-Training is Sufficient for Robustness to Spurious Correlationscited by 381
- 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 364
38 more
- 2020Combating noisy labels by agreement: A joint training method with co-regularizationcited by 289
- 2018Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?cited by 262
- 2020Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted Learningcited by 251
- 2018Empirical Risk Minimization under Fairness Constraintscited by 226
- 2020No Subclass Left Behind: Fine-Grained Robustness in Coarse-Grained Classification Problemscited by 209
- 2019Fair Regression: Quantitative Definitions and Reduction-based Algorithmscited by 168
- 2019REPAIR: Removing Representation Bias by Dataset Resamplingcited by 157
- 2020Minimax Pareto Fairness: A Multi Objective Perspectivecited by 153
- 2019Identifying and Correcting Label Bias in Machine Learningcited by 146
- 2019Inherent Tradeoffs in Learning Fair Representationscited by 144
- 2018Why Is My Classifier Discriminatory?cited by 143
- 2022Training Data Influence Analysis and Estimation: A Surveycited by 135
- 2019Fair Generative Modeling via Weak Supervisioncited by 114
- 2021Influence Selection for Active Learningcited by 84
- 2020Fair Classification with Group-Dependent Label Noisecited by 67
- 2020"What We Can't Measure, We Can't Understand": Challenges to Demographic Data Procurement in the Pursuit of Fairnesscited by 56
- 2021Towards Fair Classifiers Without Sensitive Attributes: Exploring Biases in Related Featurescited by 45
- 2022Achieving Fairness at No Utility Cost via Data Reweighing with Influencecited by 38
- 2019Toward a better trade-off between performance and fairness with kernel-based distribution matchingcited by 36
- 2023Active Finetuning: Exploiting Annotation Budget in the Pretraining-Finetuning Paradigmcited by 36
- 2021Understanding and Improving Fairness-Accuracy Trade-offs in Multi-Task Learningcited by 34
- 2022On Learning Fairness and Accuracy on Multiple Subgroupscited by 32
- 2020Fair Active Learningcited by 30
- 2022Bias Mimicking: A Simple Sampling Approach for Bias Mitigationcited by 30
- 2021The Rich Get Richer: Disparate Impact of Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 28
- 2022Fairness Transferability Subject to Bounded Distribution Shiftcited by 28
- 2022Understanding Instance-Level Impact of Fairness Constraintscited by 27
- 2020The Fairness-Accuracy Pareto Frontcited by 26
- 2018Assessing and Remedying Coverage for a Given Datasetcited by 21
- 2021Boosting Active Learning via Improving Test Performancecited by 19
- 2022Weak Proxies are Sufficient and Preferable for Fairness with Missing Sensitive Attributescited by 17
- 2019Fairness With Minimal Harm: A Pareto-Optimal Approach For Healthcarecited by 16
- 2021Can Active Learning Preemptively Mitigate Fairness Issues?cited by 15
- 2023Improving Fair Training under Correlation Shiftscited by 14
- 2023Post-hoc Bias Scoring Is Optimal For Fair Classificationcited by 14
- 2020Slice Tuner: A Selective Data Acquisition Framework for Accurate and Fair Machine Learning Modelscited by 13
- 2019What is Fair? Exploring Pareto-Efficiency for Fairness Constrained Classifierscited by 12
- 2018Importance Weighted Generative Networkscited by 7
50 most cited of 51 All 51 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 6; 2026: 5.
12 papers.
- 2025Token Cleaning: Fine-Grained Data Selection for LLM Supervised Fine-Tuningcited by 39
- 2025Fairshare Data Pricing via Data Valuation for Large Language Modelscited by 8
- 2026Small-Margin Preferences Still Matter-If You Train Them Rightcited by 2
- 2025Demographic-Agnostic Fairness without Harmcited by 1
- 2026Benchmarking Bias Mitigation Toward Fairness Without Harm from Vision to LVLMscited by 1
- 2024Fair Class-Incremental Learning using Sample Weightingcited by 0
- 2025A Critical Review of Predominant Bias in Neural Networkscited by 0
- 2025Incentivizing High-quality Participation From Federated Learning Agentscited by 0
- 2025Mind the Gaps: Auditing and Reducing Group Inequity in Large-Scale Mobility Predictioncited by 0
- 2026Task-tailored Pre-processing: Fair Downstream Supervised Learningcited by 0
- 2026Exploring Entropy-based Active Learning for Fair Brain Segmentationcited by 0
- 2026FairBED: A Bayesian Experimental Design Approach to Gathering Fairer Datacited by 0
- 2026FairBED: A Bayesian Experimental Design Approach to Gathering Fairer Data22 Jun 2026
- 2026Exploring Entropy-based Active Learning for Fair Brain Segmentation3 May 2026
- 2026Benchmarking Bias Mitigation Toward Fairness Without Harm from Vision to LVLMs3 Feb 2026
- 2026Small-Margin Preferences Still Matter-If You Train Them Right1 Feb 2026
- 2026Task-tailored Pre-processing: Fair Downstream Supervised Learning17 Jan 2026
- 2025Mind the Gaps: Auditing and Reducing Group Inequity in Large-Scale Mobility Prediction30 Oct 2025
- 2025Demographic-Agnostic Fairness without Harm28 Sep 2025
- 2025Incentivizing High-quality Participation From Federated Learning Agents20 Jun 2025
- 2025A Critical Review of Predominant Bias in Neural Networks16 Feb 2025
- 2025Token Cleaning: Fine-Grained Data Selection for LLM Supervised Fine-Tuning4 Feb 2025
- 2025Fairshare Data Pricing via Data Valuation for Large Language Models31 Jan 2025
- 2024Fair Class-Incremental Learning using Sample Weighting2 Oct 2024