Is invariance all you need for algorithmic fairness? Removing demographic information can create new bias
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Encoded demographic information in internal model representations is a commonly assumed risk factor for algorithmic bias, with demographic representation invariance often being touted as the ideal state. However, while demographic shortcut learning is a genuine threat, some degree of encoding is necessary when demographics correlate with target labels. Here, we show, mathematically and empirically, that enforcing demographic invariance can actually hamper bias mitigation and even create new biases. We distinguish marginal from class-conditional representation invariance, and show that they imply the standard group fairness notions of demographic parity and equalized odds, respectively. We evaluate the effects on predictive performance and fairness of enforcing both invariance types, both theoretically and empirically across five tabular and two chest X-ray imaging datasets. Our findings support our mathematical argument that demographic representation invariance is neither desirable nor sufficient for fairness.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 51 of its 74 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2026.
Builds on
51 of 74 references.
References · 51
- 2015Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networkscited by 3,023
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2019Invariant Risk Minimizationcited by 1,832
- 2019CheXpert: A Large Chest Radiograph Dataset with Uncertainty Labels and Expert Comparisoncited by 1,410
- 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
- 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
- 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
- 2018Learning Adversarially Fair and Transferable Representationscited by 353
- 2023LEACE: Perfect linear concept erasure in closed formcited by 254
- 2020Domain Generalization using Causal Matchingcited by 224
- 2015The Variational Fair Autoencodercited by 223
- 2019Hidden Stratification Causes Clinically Meaningful Failures in Machine Learning for Medical Imagingcited by 215
38 more
- 2019Flexibly Fair Representation Learning by Disentanglementcited by 196
- 2019Causality matters in medical imagingcited by 193
- 2015Censoring Representations with an Adversarycited by 191
- 2018Path-Specific Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 179
- 2021Reading Race: AI Recognises Patient's Racial Identity In Medical Imagescited by 155
- 2018Domain Generalization via Conditional Invariant Representationcited by 146
- 2019Inherent Tradeoffs in Learning Fair Representationscited by 144
- 2021Counterfactual Invariance to Spurious Correlations: Why and How to Pass Stress Testscited by 77
- 2022FairPrune: Achieving Fairness Through Pruning for Dermatological Disease Diagnosiscited by 59
- 2021Causally motivated Shortcut Removal Using Auxiliary Labelscited by 55
- 2022Leveling Down in Computer Vision: Pareto Inefficiencies in Fair Deep Classifierscited by 53
- 2022Detecting Shortcut Learning for Fair Medical AI using Shortcut Testingcited by 52
- 2022Kernelized Concept Erasurecited by 47
- 2021Out-of-distribution Generalization in the Presence of Nuisance-Induced Spurious Correlationscited by 41
- 2017Fair Kernel Learningcited by 39
- 2020Fundamental Limits and Tradeoffs in Invariant Representation Learningcited by 38
- 2021Fair Normalizing Flowscited by 38
- 2023The Unfairness of Fair Machine Learning: Levelling down and strict egalitarianism by defaultcited by 36
- 2019The Sensitivity of Counterfactual Fairness to Unmeasured Confoundingcited by 35
- 2020Rethinking Distributional Matching Based Domain Adaptationcited by 33
- 2019Scanner Invariant Representations for Diffusion MRI Harmonizationcited by 27
- 2023FLAC: Fairness-Aware Representation Learning by Suppressing Attribute-Class Associationscited by 18
- 2024Shortcut Learning in Medical Image Segmentationcited by 16
- 2023Toward Fairness Through Fair Multi-Exit Framework for Dermatological Disease Diagnosiscited by 14
- 2022Deep Learning Discovery of Demographic Biomarkers in Echocardiographycited by 12
- 2023On (assessing) the fairness of risk score modelscited by 12
- 2023The Role of Subgroup Separability in Group-Fair Medical Image Classificationcited by 11
- 2020A Possibility in Algorithmic Fairness: Can Calibration and Equal Error Rates Be Reconciled?cited by 10
- 2022Are Two Heads the Same as One? Identifying Disparate Treatment in Fair Neural Networkscited by 10
- 2024Rethinking Fair Representation Learning for Performance-Sensitive Taskscited by 8
- 2023Are demographically invariant models and representations in medical imaging fair?cited by 6
- 202410 Years of Fair Representations: Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 6
- 2022Adversarial Support Alignmentcited by 5
- 2025Exploring the interplay of label bias with subgroup size and separability: A case study in mammographic density classificationcited by 2
- 2026Towards Fairness under Label Bias in Image Segmentation: Impact, Measurement and Mitigationcited by 2
- 2026Fairness Under Group-Conditional Prior Probability Shift: Invariance, Drift, and Target-Aware Post-Processingcited by 1
- 2026Stride-Net: Fairness-Aware Disentangled Representation Learning for Chest X-Ray Diagnosiscited by 1
- 2026Obliviate: Erasing Concepts from Autoregressive Image Generation Modelscited by 1
50 most cited of 51 All 51 (JSON)
Built on by
Not cited yet.