De-Biasing Models of Biased Decisions: A Comparison of Methods Using Mortgage Application Data
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Prediction models can improve efficiency by automating decisions such as the approval of loan applications. However, they may inherit bias against protected groups from the data they are trained on. This paper adds counterfactual (simulated) ethnic bias to real data on mortgage application decisions, and shows that this bias is replicated by a machine learning model (XGBoost) even when ethnicity is not used as a predictive variable. Next, several other de-biasing methods are compared: averaging over prohibited variables, taking the most favorable prediction over prohibited variables (a novel method), and jointly minimizing errors as well as the association between predictions and prohibited variables. De-biasing can recover some of the original decisions, but the results are sensitive to whether the bias is effected through a proxy.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 May 2024.
Builds on
11 of 48 references.
References · 11
- 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,120
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2017Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Artcited by 315
- 2018Classification with Fairness Constraints: A Meta-Algorithm with Provable Guaranteescited by 146
- 2019Identifying and Correcting Label Bias in Machine Learningcited by 146
- 2018Why Is My Classifier Discriminatory?cited by 143
- 2022Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 125
- 2018Proxy Fairnesscited by 29
- 2021Removing biased data to improve fairness and accuracycited by 17
- 2020FairXGBoost: Fairness-aware Classification in XGBoostcited by 9
- 2021How Costly is Noise? Data and Disparities in Consumer Creditcited by 8
Built on by
Not cited yet.