Addressing Discretization-Induced Bias in Demographic Prediction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Racial and other demographic imputation is necessary for many applications, especially in auditing disparities and outreach targeting in political campaigns. The canonical approach is to construct continuous predictions -- e.g., based on name and geography -- and then to textitdiscretize the predictions by selecting the most likely class (argmax). We study how this practice produces textitdiscretization bias. In particular, we show that argmax labeling, as used by a prominent commercial voter file vendor to impute race/ethnicity, results in a substantial under-count of African-American voters, e.g., by 28.2% points in North Carolina. This bias can have substantial implications in downstream tasks that use such labels. We then introduce a textitjoint optimization approach -- and a tractable textitdata-driven thresholding heuristic -- that can eliminate this bias, with negligible individual-level accuracy loss. Finally, we theoretically analyze discretization bias, show that calibrated continuous models are insufficient to eliminate it, and that an approach such as ours is necessary. Broadly, we warn researchers and practitioners against discretizing continuous demographic predictions without considering downstream consequences.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 87 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2024.
Builds on
39 of 87 references.
References · 39
- 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
- 2016CVXPY: A Python-Embedded Modeling Language for Convex Optimizationcited by 641
- 2017Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraintscited by 420
- 2020Fairness in Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 370
- 2019Measurement and Fairnesscited by 308
- 2017Word Embeddings Quantify 100 Years of Gender and Ethnic Stereotypescited by 253
- 2019Evaluating Gender Bias in Machine Translationcited by 249
- 2018Women also Snowboard: Overcoming Bias in Captioning Modelscited by 236
- 2018Why Is My Classifier Discriminatory?cited by 143
- 2019Towards a Critical Race Methodology in Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 125
- 2018Fairness Under Unawareness: Assessing Disparity When Protected Class Is Unobservedcited by 94
- 2020Feedback Loop and Bias Amplification in Recommender Systemscited by 90
27 more
- 2019Assessing Algorithmic Fairness with Unobserved Protected Class Using Data Combinationcited by 79
- 2022A Systematic Study of Bias Amplificationcited by 65
- 2022Data Feedback Loops: Model-driven Amplification of Dataset Biasescited by 60
- 2022Towards Intersectionality in Machine Learning: Including More Identities, Handling Underrepresentation, and Performing Evaluationcited by 59
- 2020"What We Can't Measure, We Can't Understand": Challenges to Demographic Data Procurement in the Pursuit of Fairnesscited by 56
- 2021Directional Bias Amplificationcited by 54
- 2023Who Audits the Auditors? Recommendations from a field scan of the algorithmic auditing ecosystemcited by 52
- 2022Supply-Side Equilibria in Recommender Systemscited by 33
- 2018Feature-Wise Bias Amplificationcited by 31
- 2018Active Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Makingcited by 27
- 2020Mitigating Gender Bias Amplification in Distribution by Posterior Regularizationcited by 27
- 2018Predicting Race and Ethnicity From the Sequence of Characters in a Namecited by 26
- 2021When Fair Ranking Meets Uncertain Inferencecited by 22
- 2021Image Cropping on Twitter: Fairness Metrics, their Limitations, and the Importance of Representation, Design, and Agencycited by 22
- 2022Men Also Do Laundry: Multi-Attribute Bias Amplificationcited by 21
- 2019Fair Allocation through Selective Information Acquisitioncited by 16
- 2023Coarse race data conceals disparities in clinical risk score performancecited by 15
- 2023Improved Bayes Risk Can Yield Reduced Social Welfare Under Competitioncited by 14
- 2021The Stereotyping Problem in Collaboratively Filtered Recommender Systemscited by 10
- 2023Reconciling the accuracy-diversity trade-off in recommendationscited by 10
- 2023Domain constraints improve risk prediction when outcome data is missingcited by 8
- 2022Addressing Census data problems in race imputation via fully Bayesian Improved Surname Geocoding and name supplementscited by 7
- 2023Toward Operationalizing Pipeline-aware ML Fairness: A Research Agenda for Developing Practical Guidelines and Toolscited by 7
- 2021Test-optional Policies: Overcoming Strategic Behavior and Informational Gapscited by 6
- 2023Estimating Racial Disparities When Race is Not Observedcited by 4
- 2023A calibrated BISG for inferring race from surname and geolocationcited by 2
- 2022How should we proxy for race/ethnicity? Comparing Bayesian improved surname geocoding to machine learning methodscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024Learning With Multi-Group Guarantees For Clusterable Subpopulationscited by 3
- 2025A Critical Review of Predominant Bias in Neural Networkscited by 0
- 2025Near-Exponential Savings for Mean Estimation with Active Learningcited by 0
- 2026Coarsening Latent-Class Probabilities: Directional Distortion and Coverage Losscited by 0
- 2026Coarsening Latent-Class Probabilities: Directional Distortion and Coverage Loss12 Aug 2026
- 2025Near-Exponential Savings for Mean Estimation with Active Learning7 Nov 2025
- 2025A Critical Review of Predominant Bias in Neural Networks16 Feb 2025
- 2024Learning With Multi-Group Guarantees For Clusterable Subpopulations18 Oct 2024