Perceptions of the Fairness Impacts of Multiplicity in Machine Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning (ML) is increasingly used in high-stakes settings, yet multiplicity - the existence of multiple good models - means that some predictions are essentially arbitrary. ML researchers and philosophers posit that multiplicity poses a fairness risk, but no studies have investigated whether stakeholders agree. In this work, we conduct a survey to see how multiplicity impacts lay stakeholders' - i.e., decision subjects' - perceptions of ML fairness, and which approaches to address multiplicity they prefer. We investigate how these perceptions are modulated by task characteristics (e.g., stakes and uncertainty). Survey respondents think that multiplicity threatens the fairness of model outcomes, but not the appropriateness of using the model, even though existing work suggests the opposite. Participants are strongly against resolving multiplicity by using a single model (effectively ignoring multiplicity) or by randomizing the outcomes. Our results indicate that model developers should be intentional about dealing with multiplicity in order to maintain fairness.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 18 Sep 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 5.
7 papers.
- 2025Systemizing Multiplicity: The Curious Case of Arbitrariness in Machine Learningcited by 17
- 2026ElliCE: Efficient and Provably Robust Algorithmic Recourse via the Rashomon Setscited by 2
- 2026DIVERSE: Disagreement-Inducing Vector Evolution for Rashomon Set Explorationcited by 1
- 2025The Double-Edged Nature of the Rashomon Set for Trustworthy Machine Learningcited by 0
- 2026Mitigating the Multiplicity Burden: The Role of Calibration in Reducing Predictive Multiplicity of Classifierscited by 0
- 2026Explainable AI Isn't Enough! Rethinking Algorithmic Contestabilitycited by 0
- 2026Model Multiplicity and Predictive Arbitrariness in Recidivism Risk Assessmentcited by 0
- 2026Model Multiplicity and Predictive Arbitrariness in Recidivism Risk Assessment1 Jun 2026
- 2026Explainable AI Isn't Enough! Rethinking Algorithmic Contestability15 May 2026
- 2026Mitigating the Multiplicity Burden: The Role of Calibration in Reducing Predictive Multiplicity of Classifiers12 Mar 2026
- 2026ElliCE: Efficient and Provably Robust Algorithmic Recourse via the Rashomon Sets7 Feb 2026
- 2026DIVERSE: Disagreement-Inducing Vector Evolution for Rashomon Set Exploration28 Jan 2026
- 2025The Double-Edged Nature of the Rashomon Set for Trustworthy Machine Learning26 Nov 2025
- 2025Systemizing Multiplicity: The Curious Case of Arbitrariness in Machine Learning24 Jan 2025