Controlled Model Debiasing through Minimal and Interpretable Updates
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Traditional approaches to learning fair machine learning models often require rebuilding models from scratch, typically without considering potentially existing models. In a context where models need to be retrained frequently, this can lead to inconsistent model updates, as well as redundant and costly validation testing. To address this limitation, we introduce the notion of controlled model debiasing, a novel supervised learning task relying on two desiderata: that the differences between the new fair model and the existing one should be (i) minimal and (ii) interpretable. After providing theoretical guarantees to this new problem, we introduce a novel algorithm for algorithmic fairness, COMMOD, that is both model-agnostic and does not require the sensitive attribute at test time. In addition, our algorithm is explicitly designed to enforce minimal and interpretable changes between biased and debiased predictions in a binary classification task, a property that, while highly desirable in high-stakes applications, is rarely prioritized as an explicit objective in fairness literature. Our approach combines a concept-based architecture and adversarial learning and we demonstrate through empirical results that it achieves comparable performance to state-of-the-art debiasing methods while performing minimal and interpretable prediction changes.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Feb 2025.
Builds on
21 of 49 references.
References · 21
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
- 2020Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 1,032
- 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 973
- 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
- 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 586
- 2018Towards Robust Interpretability with Self-Explaining Neural Networkscited by 505
- 2017On Fairness and Calibrationcited by 406
- 2022Post-hoc Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 293
- 2023LEACE: Perfect linear concept erasure in closed formcited by 267
- 2018Multiaccuracy: Black-Box Post-Processing for Fairness in Classificationcited by 222
- 2022CRAFT: Concept Recursive Activation FacTorization for Explainabilitycited by 178
9 more
- 2019Wasserstein Fair Classificationcited by 131
- 2022Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 125
- 2019The Dangers of Post-hoc Interpretability: Unjustified Counterfactual Explanationscited by 97
- 2018Bias Mitigation Post-processing for Individual and Group Fairnesscited by 72
- 2021Fairness via Representation Neutralizationcited by 63
- 2019Leveraging Labeled and Unlabeled Data for Consistent Fair Binary Classificationcited by 60
- 2022Beyond Adult and COMPAS: Fairness in Multi-Class Predictioncited by 16
- 2024A Theory of Interpretable Approximationscited by 7
- 2022Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulationcited by 6
Built on by
Not cited yet.