mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Utility-Fairness Trade-Offs and How to Find Them

arXiv 2404.09454 ↗First posted 15 Apr 2024cs.CV cs.CY cs.LGcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

When building classification systems with demographic fairness considerations, there are two objectives to satisfy: 1) maximizing utility for the specific task and 2) ensuring fairness w.r.t. a known demographic attribute. These objectives often compete, so optimizing both can lead to a trade-off between utility and fairness. While existing works acknowledge the trade-offs and study their limits, two questions remain unanswered: 1) What are the optimal trade-offs between utility and fairness? and 2) How can we numerically quantify these trade-offs from data for a desired prediction task and demographic attribute of interest? This paper addresses these questions. We introduce two utility-fairness trade-offs: the Data-Space and Label-Space Trade-off. The trade-offs reveal three regions within the utility-fairness plane, delineating what is fully and partially possible and impossible. We propose U-FaTE, a method to numerically quantify the trade-offs for a given prediction task and group fairness definition from data samples. Based on the trade-offs, we introduce a new scheme for evaluating representations. An extensive evaluation of fair representation learning methods and representations from over 1000 pre-trained models revealed that most current approaches are far from the estimated and achievable fairness-utility trade-offs across multiple datasets and prediction tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Apr 2024.

Builds on

22 of 40 references.

References · 22

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2016SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restartscited by 4,993
  4. 2022LAION-5B: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text modelscited by 4,131
  5. 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,679
  6. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  7. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
  8. 2023DataComp: In search of the next generation of multimodal datasetscited by 635
  9. 2021ImageNet-21K Pretraining for the Massescited by 607
  10. 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 443
  11. 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
  12. 2023LEACE: Perfect linear concept erasure in closed formcited by 254
10 more
  1. 2019Towards Fairness in Visual Recognition: Effective Strategies for Bias Mitigationcited by 252
  2. 2017Avoiding Discrimination through Causal Reasoningcited by 191
  3. 2017Controllable Invariance through Adversarial Feature Learningcited by 127
  4. 2020Mitigating Face Recognition Bias via Group Adaptive Classifiercited by 67
  5. 2019Mitigating Information Leakage in Image Representations: A Maximum Entropy Approachcited by 48
  6. 2024FairerCLIP: Debiasing CLIP's Zero-Shot Predictions using Functions in RKHSscited by 25
  7. 2020Learning Unbiased Representations via R'enyi Minimizationcited by 18
  8. 2019On the Global Optima of Kernelized Adversarial Representation Learningcited by 14
  9. 2021On Characterizing the Trade-off in Invariant Representation Learningcited by 12
  10. 2021Adversarial Representation Learning With Closed-Form Solverscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 7; 2026: 4.

15 papers.

Sort:

By area: