mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On the Power of Randomization in Fair Classification and Representation

arXiv 2406.03142 ↗First posted 5 Jun 2024cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Fair classification and fair representation learning are two important problems in supervised and unsupervised fair machine learning, respectively. Fair classification asks for a classifier that maximizes accuracy on a given data distribution subject to fairness constraints. Fair representation maps a given data distribution over the original feature space to a distribution over a new representation space such that all classifiers over the representation satisfy fairness. In this paper, we examine the power of randomization in both these problems to minimize the loss of accuracy that results when we impose fairness constraints. Previous work on fair classification has characterized the optimal fair classifiers on a given data distribution that maximize accuracy subject to fairness constraints, e.g., Demographic Parity (DP), Equal Opportunity (EO), and Predictive Equality (PE). We refine these characterizations to demonstrate when the optimal randomized fair classifiers can surpass their deterministic counterparts in accuracy. We also show how the optimal randomized fair classifier that we characterize can be obtained as a solution to a convex optimization problem. Recent work has provided techniques to construct fair representations for a given data distribution such that any classifier over this representation satisfies DP. However, the classifiers on these fair representations either come with no or weak accuracy guarantees when compared to the optimal fair classifier on the original data distribution. Extending our ideas for randomized fair classification, we improve on these works, and construct DP-fair, EO-fair, and PE-fair representations that have provably optimal accuracy and suffer no accuracy loss compared to the optimal DP-fair, EO-fair, and PE-fair classifiers respectively on the original data distribution.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jun 2024.

Builds on

20 of 41 references.

References · 20

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  3. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
  4. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
  5. 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 402
  6. 2016Fairness Beyond Disparate Treatment & Disparate Impact: Learning Classification without Disparate Mistreatmentcited by 368
  7. 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
  8. 2015The Variational Fair Autoencodercited by 223
  9. 2019Flexibly Fair Representation Learning by Disentanglementcited by 196
  10. 2018Classification with Fairness Constraints: A Meta-Algorithm with Provable Guaranteescited by 146
  11. 2019Inherent Tradeoffs in Learning Fair Representationscited by 144
  12. 2019Fair Generative Modeling via Weak Supervisioncited by 114
8 more
  1. 2020Fair Regression with Wasserstein Barycenterscited by 99
  2. 2020Learning Certified Individually Fair Representationscited by 69
  3. 2021Post-processing for Individual Fairnesscited by 61
  4. 2019Leveraging Labeled and Unlabeled Data for Consistent Fair Binary Classificationcited by 60
  5. 2020Metric-Free Individual Fairness in Online Learningcited by 30
  6. 2022Bayes-Optimal Classifiers under Group Fairnesscited by 24
  7. 2019Learning Fair Representations for Kernel Modelscited by 17
  8. 2018Simplicity Creates Inequity: Implications for Fairness, Stereotypes, and Interpretabilitycited by 16

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.