mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Evaluating Fairness in Transaction Fraud Models: Fairness Metrics, Bias Audits, and Challenges

arXiv 2409.04373 ↗First posted 6 Sep 2024cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Ensuring fairness in transaction fraud detection models is vital due to the potential harms and legal implications of biased decision-making. Despite extensive research on algorithmic fairness, there is a notable gap in the study of bias in fraud detection models, mainly due to the field's unique challenges. These challenges include the need for fairness metrics that account for fraud data's imbalanced nature and the tradeoff between fraud protection and service quality. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive fairness evaluation of transaction fraud models using public synthetic datasets, marking the first algorithmic bias audit in this domain. Our findings reveal three critical insights: (1) Certain fairness metrics expose significant bias only after normalization, highlighting the impact of class imbalance. (2) Bias is significant in both service quality-related parity metrics and fraud protection-related parity metrics. (3) The fairness through unawareness approach, which involved removing sensitive attributes such as gender, does not improve bias mitigation within these datasets, likely due to the presence of correlated proxies. We also discuss socio-technical fairness-related challenges in transaction fraud models. These insights underscore the need for a nuanced approach to fairness in fraud detection, balancing protection and service quality, and moving beyond simple bias mitigation strategies. Future work must focus on refining fairness metrics and developing methods tailored to the unique complexities of the transaction fraud domain.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Sep 2024.

Builds on

13 of 51 references.

References · 13

  1. 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,455
  2. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  3. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  4. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
  5. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
  6. 2017Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Artcited by 315
  7. 2018Fairness Under Unawareness: Assessing Disparity When Protected Class Is Unobservedcited by 94
  8. 2021Fairness in Credit Scoring: Assessment, Implementation and Profit Implicationscited by 65
  9. 2021How can I choose an explainer? An Application-grounded Evaluation of Post-hoc Explanationscited by 58
  10. 2023FFB: A Fair Fairness Benchmark for In-Processing Group Fairness Methodscited by 33
  11. 2024Towards a Foundation Purchasing Model: Pretrained Generative Autoregression on Transaction Sequencescited by 11
  12. 2019Synthesizing Credit Card Transactionscited by 10
1 more
  1. 2022Understanding Unfairness in Fraud Detection through Model and Data Bias Interactionscited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.