Adaptive Bounded Exploration and Intermediate Actions for Data Debiasing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The performance of algorithmic decision rules is largely dependent on the quality of training datasets available to them. Biases in these datasets can raise economic and ethical concerns due to the resulting algorithms' disparate treatment of different groups. In this paper, we propose algorithms for sequentially debiasing the training dataset through adaptive and bounded exploration in a classification problem with costly and censored feedback. Our proposed algorithms balance between the ultimate goal of mitigating the impacts of data biases -- which will in turn lead to more accurate and fairer decisions, and the exploration risks incurred to achieve this goal. Specifically, we propose adaptive bounds to limit the region of exploration, and leverage intermediate actions which provide noisy label information at a lower cost. We analytically show that such exploration can help debias data in certain distributions, investigate how {algorithmic fairness interventions} can work in conjunction with our proposed algorithms, and validate the performance of these algorithms through numerical experiments on synthetic and real-world data.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Apr 2025.
Builds on
23 of 46 references.
References · 23
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
- 2019Introduction to Multi-Armed Banditscited by 475
- 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 443
- 2017Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairnesscited by 402
- 2019Identifying and Correcting Label Bias in Machine Learningcited by 146
- 2017Runaway Feedback Loops in Predictive Policingcited by 97
- 2019Achieving Fairness in the Stochastic Multi-armed Bandit Problemcited by 77
- 2020Fair Classification with Group-Dependent Label Noisecited by 67
- 2019Recovering from Biased Data: Can Fairness Constraints Improve Accuracy?cited by 50
- 2018Residual Unfairness in Fair Machine Learning from Prejudiced Datacited by 49
11 more
- 2017Accurate Inference for Adaptive Linear Modelscited by 39
- 2017Why Adaptively Collected Data Have Negative Bias and How to Correct for Itcited by 36
- 2019Equal Opportunity in Online Classification with Partial Feedbackcited by 34
- 2021The Rich Get Richer: Disparate Impact of Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 28
- 2019Learning in structured MDPs with convex cost functions: Improved regret bounds for inventory managementcited by 22
- 2018Mitigating Bias in Adaptive Data Gathering via Differential Privacycited by 21
- 2021Unintended Selection: Persistent Qualification Rate Disparities and Interventionscited by 18
- 2019Group Fairness in Bandit Arm Selectioncited by 12
- 2021Adaptive Data Debiasing through Bounded Explorationcited by 5
- 2022Social Bias Meets Data Bias: The Impacts of Labeling and Measurement Errors on Fairness Criteriacited by 5
- 2023Algorithmic Censoring in Dynamic Learning Systemscited by 5
Built on by
Not cited yet.