mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Perceptions of the Fairness Impacts of Multiplicity in Machine Learning

arXiv 2409.12332 ↗First posted 18 Sep 2024cs.CY cs.HCcited by 7

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

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 5.

7 papers.