Counterfactual fairness alleviates the discrimination between the model prediction toward an individual in the actual world (observational data) and that in counterfactual world (i.e., what if the individual belongs to other sensitive groups). The existing studies need to pre-define the structural causal model that captures the correlations among variables for counterfactual inference; however, the underlying causal model is usually unknown and difficult to be validated in real-world scenarios. Moreover, the misspecification of the causal model potentially leads to poor performance in model prediction and thus makes unfair decisions. In this research, we propose a novel minimax game-theoretic model for counterfactual fairness that can produce accurate results meanwhile achieve a counterfactually fair decision with the relaxation of strong assumptions of structural causal models. In addition, we also theoretically prove the error bound of the proposed minimax model. Empirical experiments on multiple real-world datasets illustrate our superior performance in both accuracy and fairness. Source code is available at \url{//github.com/tridungduong16/counterfactual_fairness_game_theoretic}.
相關內容
In eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), counterfactual explanations are known to give simple, short, and comprehensible justifications for complex model decisions. However, we are yet to see more applied studies in which they are applied in real-world cases. To fill this gap, this study focuses on showing how counterfactuals are applied to employability-related problems which involve complex machine learning algorithms. For these use cases, we use real data obtained from a public Belgian employment institution (VDAB). The use cases presented go beyond the mere application of counterfactuals as explanations, showing how they can enhance decision support, comply with legal requirements, guide controlled changes, and analyze novel insights.
Assessing the pre-operative risk of lymph node metastases in endometrial cancer patients is a complex and challenging task. In principle, machine learning and deep learning models are flexible and expressive enough to capture the dynamics of clinical risk assessment. However, in this setting we are limited to observational data with quality issues, missing values, small sample size and high dimensionality: we cannot reliably learn such models from limited observational data with these sources of bias. Instead, we choose to learn a causal Bayesian network to mitigate the issues above and to leverage the prior knowledge on endometrial cancer available from clinicians and physicians. We introduce a causal discovery algorithm for causal Bayesian networks based on bootstrap resampling, as opposed to the single imputation used in related works. Moreover, we include a context variable to evaluate whether selection bias results in learning spurious associations. Finally, we discuss the strengths and limitations of our findings in light of the presence of missing data that may be missing-not-at-random, which is common in real-world clinical settings.
The issue of group fairness in machine learning models, where certain sub-populations or groups are favored over others, has been recognized for some time. While many mitigation strategies have been proposed in centralized learning, many of these methods are not directly applicable in federated learning, where data is privately stored on multiple clients. To address this, many proposals try to mitigate bias at the level of clients before aggregation, which we call locally fair training. However, the effectiveness of these approaches is not well understood. In this work, we investigate the theoretical foundation of locally fair training by studying the relationship between global model fairness and local model fairness. Additionally, we prove that for a broad class of fairness metrics, the global model's fairness can be obtained using only summary statistics from local clients. Based on that, we propose a globally fair training algorithm that directly minimizes the penalized empirical loss. Real-data experiments demonstrate the promising performance of our proposed approach for enhancing fairness while retaining high accuracy compared to locally fair training methods.
In machine learning, training data often capture the behaviour of multiple subgroups of some underlying human population. This behaviour can often be modelled as observations of an unknown dynamical system with an unobserved state. When the training data for the subgroups are not controlled carefully, however, under-representation bias arises. To counter under-representation bias, we introduce two natural notions of fairness in time-series forecasting problems: subgroup fairness and instantaneous fairness. These notions extend predictive parity to the learning of dynamical systems. We also show globally convergent methods for the fairness-constrained learning problems using hierarchies of convexifications of non-commutative polynomial optimisation problems. We also show that by exploiting sparsity in the convexifications, we can reduce the run time of our methods considerably. Our empirical results on a biased data set motivated by insurance applications and the well-known COMPAS data set demonstrate the efficacy of our methods.
Interpreting the inner function of neural networks is crucial for the trustworthy development and deployment of these black-box models. Prior interpretability methods focus on correlation-based measures to attribute model decisions to individual examples. However, these measures are susceptible to noise and spurious correlations encoded in the model during the training phase (e.g., biased inputs, model overfitting, or misspecification). Moreover, this process has proven to result in noisy and unstable attributions that prevent any transparent understanding of the model's behavior. In this paper, we develop a robust interventional-based method grounded by causal analysis to capture cause-effect mechanisms in pre-trained neural networks and their relation to the prediction. Our novel approach relies on path interventions to infer the causal mechanisms within hidden layers and isolate relevant and necessary information (to model prediction), avoiding noisy ones. The result is task-specific causal explanatory graphs that can audit model behavior and express the actual causes underlying its performance. We apply our method to vision models trained on classification tasks. On image classification tasks, we provide extensive quantitative experiments to show that our approach can capture more stable and faithful explanations than standard attribution-based methods. Furthermore, the underlying causal graphs reveal the neural interactions in the model, making it a valuable tool in other applications (e.g., model repair).
Mechanisms used in privacy-preserving machine learning often aim to guarantee differential privacy (DP) during model training. Practical DP-ensuring training methods use randomization when fitting model parameters to privacy-sensitive data (e.g., adding Gaussian noise to clipped gradients). We demonstrate that such randomization incurs predictive multiplicity: for a given input example, the output predicted by equally-private models depends on the randomness used in training. Thus, for a given input, the predicted output can vary drastically if a model is re-trained, even if the same training dataset is used. The predictive-multiplicity cost of DP training has not been studied, and is currently neither audited for nor communicated to model designers and stakeholders. We derive a bound on the number of re-trainings required to estimate predictive multiplicity reliably. We analyze--both theoretically and through extensive experiments--the predictive-multiplicity cost of three DP-ensuring algorithms: output perturbation, objective perturbation, and DP-SGD. We demonstrate that the degree of predictive multiplicity rises as the level of privacy increases, and is unevenly distributed across individuals and demographic groups in the data. Because randomness used to ensure DP during training explains predictions for some examples, our results highlight a fundamental challenge to the justifiability of decisions supported by differentially private models in high-stakes settings. We conclude that practitioners should audit the predictive multiplicity of their DP-ensuring algorithms before deploying them in applications of individual-level consequence.
Even when the causal graph underlying our data is unknown, we can use observational data to narrow down the possible values that an average treatment effect (ATE) can take by (1) identifying the graph up to a Markov equivalence class; and (2) estimating that ATE for each graph in the class. While the PC algorithm can identify this class under strong faithfulness assumptions, it can be computationally prohibitive. Fortunately, only the local graph structure around the treatment is required to identify the set of possible ATE values, a fact exploited by local discovery algorithms to improve computational efficiency. In this paper, we introduce Local Discovery using Eager Collider Checks (LDECC), a new local causal discovery algorithm that leverages unshielded colliders to orient the treatment's parents differently from existing methods. We show that there exist graphs where LDECC exponentially outperforms existing local discovery algorithms and vice versa. Moreover, we show that LDECC and existing algorithms rely on different faithfulness assumptions, leveraging this insight to weaken the assumptions for identifying the set of possible ATE values.
Opinion diffusion is a crucial phenomenon in social networks, often underlying the way in which a collective of agents develops a consensus on relevant decisions. The voter model is a well-known theoretical model to study opinion spreading in social networks and structured populations. Its simplest version assumes that an updating agent will adopt the opinion of a neighboring agent chosen at random. The model allows us to study, for example, the probability that a certain opinion will fixate into a consensus opinion, as well as the expected time it takes for a consensus opinion to emerge. Standard voter models are oblivious to the opinions held by the agents involved in the opinion adoption process. We propose and study a context-dependent opinion spreading process on an arbitrary social graph, in which the probability that an agent abandons opinion $a$ in favor of opinion $b$ depends on both $a$ and $b$. We discuss the relations of the model with existing voter models and then derive theoretical results for both the fixation probability and the expected consensus time for two opinions, for both the synchronous and the asynchronous update models.
Causality can be described in terms of a structural causal model (SCM) that carries information on the variables of interest and their mechanistic relations. For most processes of interest the underlying SCM will only be partially observable, thus causal inference tries to leverage any exposed information. Graph neural networks (GNN) as universal approximators on structured input pose a viable candidate for causal learning, suggesting a tighter integration with SCM. To this effect we present a theoretical analysis from first principles that establishes a novel connection between GNN and SCM while providing an extended view on general neural-causal models. We then establish a new model class for GNN-based causal inference that is necessary and sufficient for causal effect identification. Our empirical illustration on simulations and standard benchmarks validate our theoretical proofs.
This paper focuses on the expected difference in borrower's repayment when there is a change in the lender's credit decisions. Classical estimators overlook the confounding effects and hence the estimation error can be magnificent. As such, we propose another approach to construct the estimators such that the error can be greatly reduced. The proposed estimators are shown to be unbiased, consistent, and robust through a combination of theoretical analysis and numerical testing. Moreover, we compare the power of estimating the causal quantities between the classical estimators and the proposed estimators. The comparison is tested across a wide range of models, including linear regression models, tree-based models, and neural network-based models, under different simulated datasets that exhibit different levels of causality, different degrees of nonlinearity, and different distributional properties. Most importantly, we apply our approaches to a large observational dataset provided by a global technology firm that operates in both the e-commerce and the lending business. We find that the relative reduction of estimation error is strikingly substantial if the causal effects are accounted for correctly.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191