Software Fairness Dilemma: Is Bias Mitigation a Zero-Sum Game?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Fairness is a critical requirement for Machine Learning (ML) software, driving the development of numerous bias mitigation methods. Previous research has identified a leveling-down effect in bias mitigation for computer vision and natural language processing tasks, where fairness is achieved by lowering performance for all groups without benefiting the unprivileged group. However, it remains unclear whether this effect applies to bias mitigation for tabular data tasks, a key area in fairness research with significant real-world applications. This study evaluates eight bias mitigation methods for tabular data, including both widely used and cutting-edge approaches, across 44 tasks using five real-world datasets and four common ML models. Contrary to earlier findings, our results show that these methods operate in a zero-sum fashion, where improvements for unprivileged groups are related to reduced benefits for traditionally privileged groups. However, previous research indicates that the perception of a zero-sum trade-off might complicate the broader adoption of fairness policies. To explore alternatives, we investigate an approach that applies the state-of-the-art bias mitigation method solely to unprivileged groups, showing potential to enhance benefits of unprivileged groups without negatively affecting privileged groups or overall ML performance. Our study highlights potential pathways for achieving fairness improvements without zero-sum trade-offs, which could help advance the adoption of bias mitigation methods.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Aug 2025.
Builds on
19 of 44 references.
References · 19
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
- 2016Fairness Beyond Disparate Treatment & Disparate Impact: Learning Classification without Disparate Mistreatmentcited by 368
- 2019Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizonscited by 213
- 2018A comparative study of fairness-enhancing interventions in machine learningcited by 208
- 2022Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 125
- 2021Bias in Machine Learning Software: Why? How? What to do?cited by 92
- 2022Fairness Testing: A Comprehensive Survey and Analysis of Trendscited by 61
- 2020Do the Machine Learning Models on a Crowd Sourced Platform Exhibit Bias? An Empirical Study on Model Fairnesscited by 52
- 2021Fair Preprocessing: Towards Understanding Compositional Fairness of Data Transformers in Machine Learning Pipelinecited by 49
- 2021NeuronFair: Interpretable White-Box Fairness Testing through Biased Neuron Identificationcited by 42
- 2023The Unfairness of Fair Machine Learning: Levelling down and strict egalitarianism by defaultcited by 36
7 more
- 2022A Comprehensive Empirical Study of Bias Mitigation Methods for Machine Learning Classifierscited by 30
- 2022Fairness-aware Configuration of Machine Learning Librariescited by 28
- 2022FairNeuron: Improving Deep Neural Network Fairness with Adversary Games on Selective Neuronscited by 20
- 2021FairMask: Better Fairness via Model-based Rebalancing of Protected Attributescited by 19
- 2022Adaptive Fairness Improvement Based on Causality Analysiscited by 17
- 2024A Large-Scale Empirical Study on Improving the Fairness of Image Classification Modelscited by 6
- 2023Don't Lie to Me: Avoiding Malicious Explanations with STEALTHcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.