Demographic-Agnostic Fairness without Harm
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As machine learning (ML) algorithms are increasingly used in social domains to make predictions about humans, there is a growing concern that these algorithms may exhibit biases against certain social groups. Numerous notions of fairness have been proposed in the literature to measure the unfairness of ML. Among them, one class that receives the most attention is textitparity-based, i.e., achieving fairness by equalizing treatment or outcomes for different social groups. However, achieving parity-based fairness often comes at the cost of lowering model accuracy and is undesirable for many high-stakes domains like healthcare. To avoid inferior accuracy, a line of research focuses on textitpreference-based fairness, under which any group of individuals would experience the highest accuracy and collectively prefer the ML outcomes assigned to them if they were given the choice between various sets of outcomes. However, these works assume individual demographic information is known and fully accessible during training. In this paper, we relax this requirement and propose a novel textitdemographic-agnostic fairness without harm (DAFH) optimization algorithm, which jointly learns a group classifier that partitions the population into multiple groups and a set of decoupled classifiers associated with these groups. Theoretically, we conduct sample complexity analysis and show that our method can outperform the baselines when demographic information is known and used to train decoupled classifiers. Experiments on both synthetic and real data validate the proposed method.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2025.
Builds on
20 of 45 references.
References · 20
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2017Preventing Fairness Gerrymandering: Auditing and Learning for Subgroup Fairnesscited by 384
- 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 364
- 2020Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted Learningcited by 251
- 2020No Subclass Left Behind: Fine-Grained Robustness in Coarse-Grained Classification Problemscited by 209
- 2017From Parity to Preference-based Notions of Fairness in Classificationcited by 60
- 2020How Do Fair Decisions Fare in Long-term Qualification?cited by 60
- 2020"What We Can't Measure, We Can't Understand": Challenges to Demographic Data Procurement in the Pursuit of Fairnesscited by 56
- 2019Group Retention when Using Machine Learning in Sequential Decision Making: the Interplay between User Dynamics and Fairnesscited by 38
- 2020Fairness in Learning-Based Sequential Decision Algorithms: A Surveycited by 35
- 2021Evaluating Fairness of Machine Learning Models Under Uncertain and Incomplete Informationcited by 33
- 2023Fairness and Accuracy under Domain Generalizationcited by 24
8 more
- 2021Fairness without the sensitive attribute via Causal Variational Autoencodercited by 21
- 2022Weak Proxies are Sufficient and Preferable for Fairness with Missing Sensitive Attributescited by 17
- 2021Fair Sequential Selection Using Supervised Learning Modelscited by 16
- 2022Fair Ranking as Fair Division: Impact-Based Individual Fairness in Rankingcited by 13
- 2024Fairness Without Harm: An Influence-Guided Active Sampling Approachcited by 12
- 2023Loss Balancing for Fair Supervised Learningcited by 11
- 2023Hyper-parameter Tuning for Fair Classification without Sensitive Attribute Accesscited by 3
- 2025Post-processing for Fair Regression via Explainable SVDcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.