mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Fairness Evaluation with Item Response Theory

arXiv 2411.02414 ↗First posted 20 Oct 2024cs.CY cs.LGcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Item Response Theory (IRT) has been widely used in educational psychometrics to assess student ability, as well as the difficulty and discrimination of test questions. In this context, discrimination specifically refers to how effectively a question distinguishes between students of different ability levels, and it does not carry any connotation related to fairness. In recent years, IRT has been successfully used to evaluate the predictive performance of Machine Learning (ML) models, but this paper marks its first application in fairness evaluation. In this paper, we propose a novel Fair-IRT framework to evaluate a set of predictive models on a set of individuals, while simultaneously eliciting specific parameters, namely, the ability to make fair predictions (a feature of predictive models), as well as the discrimination and difficulty of individuals that affect the prediction results. Furthermore, we conduct a series of experiments to comprehensively understand the implications of these parameters for fairness evaluation. Detailed explanations for item characteristic curves (ICCs) are provided for particular individuals. We propose the flatness of ICCs to disentangle the unfairness between individuals and predictive models. The experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of this framework as a fairness evaluation tool. Two real-world case studies illustrate its potential application in evaluating fairness in both classification and regression tasks. Our paper aligns well with the Responsible Web track by proposing a Fair-IRT framework to evaluate fairness in ML models, which directly contributes to the development of a more inclusive, equitable, and trustworthy AI.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Oct 2024.

Builds on

17 of 54 references.

References · 17

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  3. 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
  4. 2016Fairness Beyond Disparate Treatment & Disparate Impact: Learning Classification without Disparate Mistreatmentcited by 368
  5. 2015The Variational Fair Autoencodercited by 223
  6. 2018Path-Specific Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 179
  7. 2017Fair Inference On Outcomescited by 143
  8. 2016A causal framework for discovering and removing direct and indirect discriminationcited by 71
  9. 2024FairGT: A Fairness-aware Graph Transformercited by 29
  10. 2019β3-IRT: A New Item Response Model and its Applicationscited by 17
  11. 2023Causal Inference with Conditional Front-Door Adjustment and Identifiable Variational Autoencodercited by 17
  12. 2024How to be fair? A study of label and selection biascited by 11
5 more
  1. 2024FUGNN: Harmonizing Fairness and Utility in Graph Neural Networkscited by 11
  2. 2020Assessing Classifier Fairness with Collider Biascited by 8
  3. 2023Counterfactual Situation Testing: Uncovering Discrimination under Fairness given the Differencecited by 8
  4. 2022Disentangled Representation with Causal Constraints for Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 7
  5. 2023Comprehensive Algorithm Portfolio Evaluation using Item Response Theorycited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 3.

7 papers.