亚洲男人的天堂2018av,欧美草比,久久久久久免费视频精选,国色天香在线看免费,久久久久亚洲av成人片仓井空

We consider the problem of subset selection where one is given multiple rankings of items and the goal is to select the highest ``quality'' subset. Score functions from the multiwinner voting literature have been used to aggregate rankings into quality scores for subsets. We study this setting of subset selection problems when, in addition, rankings may contain systemic or unconscious biases toward a group of items. For a general model of input rankings and biases, we show that requiring the selected subset to satisfy group fairness constraints can improve the quality of the selection with respect to unbiased rankings. Importantly, we show that for fairness constraints to be effective, different multiwinner score functions may require a drastically different number of rankings: While for some functions, fairness constraints need an exponential number of rankings to recover a close-to-optimal solution, for others, this dependency is only polynomial. This result relies on a novel notion of ``smoothness'' of submodular functions in this setting that quantifies how well a function can ``correctly'' assess the quality of items in the presence of bias. The results in this paper can be used to guide the choice of multiwinner score functions for the subset selection setting considered here; we additionally provide a tool to empirically enable this.

This paper introduces the Fair Fairness Benchmark (\textsf{FFB}), a benchmarking framework for in-processing group fairness methods. Ensuring fairness in machine learning is critical for ethical and legal compliance. However, there exist challenges in comparing and developing of fairness methods due to inconsistencies in experimental settings, lack of accessible algorithmic implementations, and limited extensibility of current fairness packages and tools. To address these issues, we introduce an open-source, standardized benchmark for evaluating in-processing group fairness methods and provide a comprehensive analysis of state-of-the-art methods to ensure different notions of group fairness. This work offers the following key contributions: the provision of flexible, extensible, minimalistic, and research-oriented open-source code; the establishment of unified fairness method benchmarking pipelines; and extensive benchmarking, which yields key insights from $\mathbf{45,079}$ experiments. We believe our work will significantly facilitate the growth and development of the fairness research community. The benchmark, including code and running logs, is available at //github.com/ahxt/fair_fairness_benchmark

Seven years ago, researchers proposed a postprocessing method to equalize the error rates of a model across different demographic groups. The work launched hundreds of papers purporting to improve over the postprocessing baseline. We empirically evaluate these claims through thousands of model evaluations on several tabular datasets. We find that the fairness-accuracy Pareto frontier achieved by postprocessing contains all other methods we were feasibly able to evaluate. In doing so, we address two common methodological errors that have confounded previous observations. One relates to the comparison of methods with different unconstrained base models. The other concerns methods achieving different levels of constraint relaxation. At the heart of our study is a simple idea we call unprocessing that roughly corresponds to the inverse of postprocessing. Unprocessing allows for a direct comparison of methods using different underlying models and levels of relaxation. Interpreting our findings, we recall a widely overlooked theoretical argument, present seven years ago, that accurately predicted what we observe.

With the introduction of machine learning in high-stakes decision making, ensuring algorithmic fairness has become an increasingly important problem to solve. In response to this, many mathematical definitions of fairness have been proposed, and a variety of optimisation techniques have been developed, all designed to maximise a defined notion of fairness. However, fair solutions are reliant on the quality of the training data, and can be highly sensitive to noise. Recent studies have shown that robustness (the ability for a model to perform well on unseen data) plays a significant role in the type of strategy that should be used when approaching a new problem and, hence, measuring the robustness of these strategies has become a fundamental problem. In this work, we therefore propose a new criterion to measure the robustness of various fairness optimisation strategies - the robustness ratio. We conduct multiple extensive experiments on five bench mark fairness data sets using three of the most popular fairness strategies with respect to four of the most popular definitions of fairness. Our experiments empirically show that fairness methods that rely on threshold optimisation are very sensitive to noise in all the evaluated data sets, despite mostly outperforming other methods. This is in contrast to the other two methods, which are less fair for low noise scenarios but fairer for high noise ones. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to quantitatively evaluate the robustness of fairness optimisation strategies. This can potentially can serve as a guideline in choosing the most suitable fairness strategy for various data sets.

A variety of different performance metrics are commonly used in the machine learning literature for the evaluation of classification systems. Some of the most common ones for measuring quality of hard decisions are standard and balanced accuracy, standard and balanced error rate, F-beta score, and Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC). In this document, we review the definition of these and other metrics and compare them with the expected cost (EC), a metric introduced in every statistical learning course but rarely used in the machine learning literature. We show that both the standard and balanced error rates are special cases of the EC. Further, we show its relation with F-score and MCC and argue that EC is superior to these traditional metrics, being more elegant, general, and intuitive, as well as being based on basic principles from statistics. The metrics above measure the quality of hard decisions. Yet, most modern classification systems output continuous scores for the classes which we may want to evaluate directly. Metrics for measuring the quality of system scores include the area under the ROC curve, equal error rate, cross-entropy, Brier score, and Bayes EC or Bayes risk, among others. The last three metrics are special cases of a family of metrics given by the expected value of proper scoring rules (PSRs). We review the theory behind these metrics and argue that they are the most principled way to measure the quality of the posterior probabilities produced by a system. Finally, we show how to use these metrics to compute the system's calibration loss and compare this metric with the standard expected calibration error (ECE), arguing that calibration loss based on PSRs is superior to the ECE for a variety of reasons.

Federated learning (FL) as distributed machine learning has gained popularity as privacy-aware Machine Learning (ML) systems have emerged as a technique that prevents privacy leakage by building a global model and by conducting individualized training of decentralized edge clients on their own private data. The existing works, however, employ privacy mechanisms such as Secure Multiparty Computing (SMC), Differential Privacy (DP), etc. Which are immensely susceptible to interference, massive computational overhead, low accuracy, etc. With the increasingly broad deployment of FL systems, it is challenging to ensure fairness and maintain active client participation in FL systems. Very few works ensure reasonably satisfactory performances for the numerous diverse clients and fail to prevent potential bias against particular demographics in FL systems. The current efforts fail to strike a compromise between privacy, fairness, and model performance in FL systems and are vulnerable to a number of additional problems. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive survey stating the basic concepts of FL, the existing privacy challenges, techniques, and relevant works concerning privacy in FL. We also provide an extensive overview of the increasing fairness challenges, existing fairness notions, and the limited works that attempt both privacy and fairness in FL. By comprehensively describing the existing FL systems, we present the potential future directions pertaining to the challenges of privacy-preserving and fairness-aware FL systems.

Empirical evidence suggests that algorithmic decisions driven by Machine Learning (ML) techniques threaten to discriminate against legally protected groups or create new sources of unfairness. This work supports the contextual approach to fairness in EU non-discrimination legal framework and aims at assessing up to what point we can assure legal fairness through fairness metrics and under fairness constraints. For that, we analyze the legal notion of non-discrimination and differential treatment with the fairness definition Demographic Parity (DP) through Conditional Demographic Disparity (CDD). We train and compare different classifiers with fairness constraints to assess whether it is possible to reduce bias in the prediction while enabling the contextual approach to judicial interpretation practiced under EU non-discrimination laws. Our experimental results on three scenarios show that the in-processing bias mitigation algorithm leads to different performances in each of them. Our experiments and analysis suggest that AI-assisted decision-making can be fair from a legal perspective depending on the case at hand and the legal justification. These preliminary results encourage future work which will involve further case studies, metrics, and fairness notions.

Node classification on graphs is a significant task with a wide range of applications, including social analysis and anomaly detection. Even though graph neural networks (GNNs) have produced promising results on this task, current techniques often presume that label information of nodes is accurate, which may not be the case in real-world applications. To tackle this issue, we investigate the problem of learning on graphs with label noise and develop a novel approach dubbed Consistent Graph Neural Network (CGNN) to solve it. Specifically, we employ graph contrastive learning as a regularization term, which promotes two views of augmented nodes to have consistent representations. Since this regularization term cannot utilize label information, it can enhance the robustness of node representations to label noise. Moreover, to detect noisy labels on the graph, we present a sample selection technique based on the homophily assumption, which identifies noisy nodes by measuring the consistency between the labels with their neighbors. Finally, we purify these confident noisy labels to permit efficient semantic graph learning. Extensive experiments on three well-known benchmark datasets demonstrate the superiority of our CGNN over competing approaches.

To address the sparsity and cold start problem of collaborative filtering, researchers usually make use of side information, such as social networks or item attributes, to improve recommendation performance. This paper considers the knowledge graph as the source of side information. To address the limitations of existing embedding-based and path-based methods for knowledge-graph-aware recommendation, we propose Ripple Network, an end-to-end framework that naturally incorporates the knowledge graph into recommender systems. Similar to actual ripples propagating on the surface of water, Ripple Network stimulates the propagation of user preferences over the set of knowledge entities by automatically and iteratively extending a user's potential interests along links in the knowledge graph. The multiple "ripples" activated by a user's historically clicked items are thus superposed to form the preference distribution of the user with respect to a candidate item, which could be used for predicting the final clicking probability. Through extensive experiments on real-world datasets, we demonstrate that Ripple Network achieves substantial gains in a variety of scenarios, including movie, book and news recommendation, over several state-of-the-art baselines.

While it is nearly effortless for humans to quickly assess the perceptual similarity between two images, the underlying processes are thought to be quite complex. Despite this, the most widely used perceptual metrics today, such as PSNR and SSIM, are simple, shallow functions, and fail to account for many nuances of human perception. Recently, the deep learning community has found that features of the VGG network trained on the ImageNet classification task has been remarkably useful as a training loss for image synthesis. But how perceptual are these so-called "perceptual losses"? What elements are critical for their success? To answer these questions, we introduce a new Full Reference Image Quality Assessment (FR-IQA) dataset of perceptual human judgments, orders of magnitude larger than previous datasets. We systematically evaluate deep features across different architectures and tasks and compare them with classic metrics. We find that deep features outperform all previous metrics by huge margins. More surprisingly, this result is not restricted to ImageNet-trained VGG features, but holds across different deep architectures and levels of supervision (supervised, self-supervised, or even unsupervised). Our results suggest that perceptual similarity is an emergent property shared across deep visual representations.