mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Overcoming Fairness Trade-offs via Pre-processing: A Causal Perspective

arXiv 2501.14710 ↗First posted 24 Jan 2025stat.ML cs.LGcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Training machine learning models for fair decisions faces two key challenges: The fairness-accuracy trade-off results from enforcing fairness which weakens its predictive performance in contrast to an unconstrained model. The incompatibility of different fairness metrics poses another trade-off -- also known as the impossibility theorem. Recent work identifies the bias within the observed data as a possible root cause and shows that fairness and predictive performance are in fact in accord when predictive performance is measured on unbiased data. We offer a causal explanation for these findings using the framework of the FiND (fictitious and normatively desired) world, a "fair" world, where protected attributes have no causal effects on the target variable. We show theoretically that (i) classical fairness metrics deemed to be incompatible are naturally satisfied in the FiND world, while (ii) fairness aligns with high predictive performance. We extend our analysis by suggesting how one can benefit from these theoretical insights in practice, using causal pre-processing methods that approximate the FiND world. Additionally, we propose a method for evaluating the approximation of the FiND world via pre-processing in practical use cases where we do not have access to the FiND world. In simulations and empirical studies, we demonstrate that these pre-processing methods are successful in approximating the FiND world and resolve both trade-offs. Our results provide actionable solutions for practitioners to achieve fairness and high predictive performance simultaneously.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 38 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jan 2025.

Builds on

38 of 62 references.

References · 38

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  2. 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
  3. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
  4. 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
  5. 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 402
  6. 2017Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairnesscited by 381
  7. 2016Fairness Beyond Disparate Treatment & Disparate Impact: Learning Classification without Disparate Mistreatmentcited by 368
  8. 2018Empirical Risk Minimization under Fairness Constraintscited by 226
  9. 2017Avoiding Discrimination through Causal Reasoningcited by 191
  10. 2018Path-Specific Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 179
  11. 2017A Convex Framework for Fair Regressioncited by 147
  12. 2018Classification with Fairness Constraints: A Meta-Algorithm with Provable Guaranteescited by 146
26 more
  1. 2019On the Apparent Conflict Between Individual and Group Fairnesscited by 126
  2. 2018Optimization with Non-Differentiable Constraints with Applications to Fairness, Recall, Churn, and Other Goalscited by 103
  3. 2018The Measure and Mismeasure of Fairnesscited by 94
  4. 2016A Confidence-Based Approach for Balancing Fairness and Accuracycited by 73
  5. 2020Learning Certified Individually Fair Representationscited by 69
  6. 2021Fairness in Credit Scoring: Assessment, Implementation and Profit Implicationscited by 65
  7. 2018iFair: Learning Individually Fair Data Representations for Algorithmic Decision Makingcited by 64
  8. 2018Causal Reasoning for Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 51
  9. 2019Recovering from Biased Data: Can Fairness Constraints Improve Accuracy?cited by 50
  10. 2015On the relation between accuracy and fairness in binary classificationcited by 47
  11. 2022Causal Structure Learning: a Combinatorial Perspectivecited by 46
  12. 2020Empirical observation of negligible fairness-accuracy trade-offs in machine learning for public policycited by 44
  13. 2019Fair Data Adaptation with Quantile Preservationcited by 29
  14. 2019Auditing and Achieving Intersectional Fairness in Classification Problemscited by 25
  15. 2020Does enforcing fairness mitigate biases caused by subpopulation shift?cited by 25
  16. 2022FairGBM: Gradient Boosting with Fairness Constraintscited by 25
  17. 2023The Possibility of Fairness: Revisiting the Impossibility Theorem in Practicecited by 18
  18. 2023Unprocessing Seven Years of Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 18
  19. 2022Fair Data Representation for Machine Learning at the Pareto Frontiercited by 12
  20. 2024How to be fair? A study of label and selection biascited by 11
  21. 2024Fairness-Accuracy Trade-Offs: A Causal Perspectivecited by 10
  22. 2021Fairness Through Regularization for Learning to Rankcited by 8
  23. 2022What Is Fairness? On the Role of Protected Attributes and Fictitious Worldscited by 6
  24. 2023How Far Can Fairness Constraints Help Recover From Biased Data?cited by 5
  25. 2023Causal Fair Machine Learning via Rank-Preserving Interventional Distributionscited by 4
  26. 2024Counterfactual Fairness Is Not Demographic Parity, and Other Observationscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 5.

5 papers.