mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Be Intentional About Fairness!: Fairness, Size, and Multiplicity in the Rashomon Set

arXiv 2501.15634 ↗First posted 26 Jan 2025cs.CY cs.LGcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

When selecting a model from a set of equally performant models, how much unfairness can you really reduce? Is it important to be intentional about fairness when choosing among this set, or is arbitrarily choosing among the set of ''good'' models good enough? Recent work has highlighted that the phenomenon of model multiplicity-where multiple models with nearly identical predictive accuracy exist for the same task-has both positive and negative implications for fairness, from strengthening the enforcement of civil rights law in AI systems to showcasing arbitrariness in AI decision-making. Despite the enormous implications of model multiplicity, there is little work that explores the properties of sets of equally accurate models, or Rashomon sets, in general. In this paper, we present five main theoretical and methodological contributions which help us to understand the relatively unexplored properties of the Rashomon set, in particular with regards to fairness. Our contributions include methods for efficiently sampling models from this set and techniques for identifying the fairest models according to key fairness metrics such as statistical parity. We also derive the probability that an individual's prediction will be flipped within the Rashomon set, as well as expressions for the set's size and the distribution of error tolerance used across models. These results lead to policy-relevant takeaways, such as the importance of intentionally looking for fair models within the Rashomon set, and understanding which individuals or groups may be more susceptible to arbitrary decisions.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jan 2025.

Builds on

18 of 38 references.

References · 18

  1. 2020Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learningcited by 488
  2. 2019Predictive Multiplicity in Classificationcited by 162
  3. 2019On the Existence of Simpler Machine Learning Modelscited by 87
  4. 2022Exploring the Whole Rashomon Set of Sparse Decision Treescited by 80
  5. 2020On Counterfactual Explanations under Predictive Multiplicitycited by 73
  6. 2021Characterizing Fairness Over the Set of Good Models Under Selective Labelscited by 65
  7. 2024Amazing Things Come From Having Many Good Modelscited by 52
  8. 2020Empirical observation of negligible fairness-accuracy trade-offs in machine learning for public policycited by 44
  9. 2022Predictive Multiplicity in Probabilistic Classificationcited by 44
  10. 2021Consistent Counterfactuals for Deep Modelscited by 37
  11. 2021Leave-one-out Unfairnesscited by 36
  12. 2023Arbitrariness and Social Prediction: The Confounding Role of Variance in Fair Classificationcited by 31
6 more
  1. 2021Selective Ensembles for Consistent Predictionscited by 23
  2. 2019Variable Importance Clouds: A Way to Explore Variable Importance for the Set of Good Modelscited by 19
  3. 2020Affirmative Algorithms: The Legal Grounds for Fairness as Awarenesscited by 15
  4. 2022Reconciling Individual Probability Forecastscited by 14
  5. 2022Computing the Collection of Good Models for Rule Listscited by 12
  6. 2024Algorithmic Arbitrariness in Content Moderationcited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 6; 2026: 4.

10 papers.