Debiasing Machine Learning Models by Using Weakly Supervised Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We tackle the problem of bias mitigation of algorithmic decisions in a setting where both the output of the algorithm and the sensitive variable are continuous. Most of prior work deals with discrete sensitive variables, meaning that the biases are measured for subgroups of persons defined by a label, leaving out important algorithmic bias cases, where the sensitive variable is continuous. Typical examples are unfair decisions made with respect to the age or the financial status. In our work, we then propose a bias mitigation strategy for continuous sensitive variables, based on the notion of endogeneity which comes from the field of econometrics. In addition to solve this new problem, our bias mitigation strategy is a weakly supervised learning method which requires that a small portion of the data can be measured in a fair manner. It is model agnostic, in the sense that it does not make any hypothesis on the prediction model. It also makes use of a reasonably large amount of input observations and their corresponding predictions. Only a small fraction of the true output predictions should be known. This therefore limits the need for expert interventions. Results obtained on synthetic data show the effectiveness of our approach for examples as close as possible to real-life applications in econometrics.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Feb 2024.
Builds on
21 of 55 references.
References · 21
- 2013Sinkhorn Distances: Lightspeed Computation of Optimal Transportation Distancescited by 2,316
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
- 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 804
- 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
- 2019Algorithm Unrolling: Interpretable, Efficient Deep Learning for Signal and Image Processingcited by 421
- 2017Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Artcited by 315
- 2015Learning with a Wasserstein Losscited by 196
- 2020Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 194
- 2019Wasserstein Fair Classificationcited by 131
- 2022A Survey on the Fairness of Recommender Systemscited by 102
- 2018The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra Dimensioncited by 67
9 more
- 2020Solving Inverse Problems With Deep Neural Networks -- Robustness Included?cited by 58
- 2020A survey of bias in Machine Learning through the prism of Statistical Parity for the Adult Data Setcited by 35
- 2021End-to-end reconstruction meets data-driven regularization for inverse problemscited by 32
- 2019General Fair Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 23
- 2020Review of Mathematical frameworks for Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 21
- 2019Tackling Algorithmic Bias in Neural-Network Classifiers using Wasserstein-2 Regularizationcited by 18
- 2022Introducing the Expohedron for Efficient Pareto-optimal Fairness-Utility Amortizations in Repeated Rankingscited by 11
- 2022Simplicity Bias Leads to Amplified Performance Disparitiescited by 11
- 2022A survey of Identification and mitigation of Machine Learning algorithmic biases in Image Analysiscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.