Learning Social Fairness Preferences from Non-Expert Stakeholder Opinions in Kidney Placement
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Modern kidney placement incorporates several intelligent recommendation systems which exhibit social discrimination due to biases inherited from training data. Although initial attempts were made in the literature to study algorithmic fairness in kidney placement, these methods replace true outcomes with surgeons' decisions due to the long delays involved in recording such outcomes reliably. However, the replacement of true outcomes with surgeons' decisions disregards expert stakeholders' biases as well as social opinions of other stakeholders who do not possess medical expertise. This paper alleviates the latter concern and designs a novel fairness feedback survey to evaluate an acceptance rate predictor (ARP) that predicts a kidney's acceptance rate in a given kidney-match pair. The survey is launched on Prolific, a crowdsourcing platform, and public opinions are collected from 85 anonymous crowd participants. A novel social fairness preference learning algorithm is proposed based on minimizing social feedback regret computed using a novel logit-based fairness feedback model. The proposed model and learning algorithm are both validated using simulation experiments as well as Prolific data. Public preferences towards group fairness notions in the context of kidney placement have been estimated and discussed in detail. The specific ARP tested in the Prolific survey has been deemed fair by the participants.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Apr 2024.
Builds on
11 of 29 references.
References · 11
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
- 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 672
- 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 403
- 2020Fairness in Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 370
- 2017Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Artcited by 315
- 2020Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 143
- 2018The Frontiers of Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 141
- 2019Mathematical Notions vs. Human Perception of Fairness: A Descriptive Approach to Fairness for Machine Learningcited by 57
- 2018Human Perceptions of Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: A Case Study of Criminal Risk Predictioncited by 35
- 2023Learning Optimal Fair Scoring Systems for Multi-Class Classificationcited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.