Classification with abstention but without disparities

Classification with abstention has gained a lot of attention in recent years as it allows to incorporate human decision-makers in the process. Yet, abstention can potentially amplify disparities and lead to discriminatory predictions. The goal of this work is to build a general purpose classification algorithm, which is able to abstain from prediction, while avoiding disparate impact. We formalize this problem as risk minimization under fairness and abstention constraints for which we derive the form of the optimal classifier. Building on this result, we propose a post-processing classification algorithm, which is able to modify any off-the-shelf scorebased classifier using only unlabeled sample. We establish finite sample risk, fairness, and abstention guarantees for the proposed algorithm. In particular, it is shown that fairness and abstention constraints can be achieved independently from the initial classifier as long as sufficiently many unlabeled data is available. The risk guarantee is established in terms of the quality of the initial classifier. Our post-processing scheme reduces to a sparse linear program allowing for an efficient implementation, which we provide. Finally, we validate our method empirically showing that moderate abstention rates allow to bypass the risk-fairness trade-off.

[1]  László Györfi,et al.  A Probabilistic Theory of Pattern Recognition , 1996, Stochastic Modelling and Applied Probability.

[2]  Luca Oneto,et al.  Leveraging Labeled and Unlabeled Data for Consistent Fair Binary Classification , 2019, NeurIPS.

[3]  Nathan Srebro,et al.  Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning , 2016, NIPS.

[4]  Joel Nothman,et al.  SciPy 1.0-Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python , 2019, ArXiv.

[5]  Erwan Scornet,et al.  Minimax optimal rates for Mondrian trees and forests , 2018, The Annals of Statistics.

[6]  Ming Yuan,et al.  Classification Methods with Reject Option Based on Convex Risk Minimization , 2010, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[7]  Luca Oneto,et al.  Fair regression via plug-in estimator and recalibration with statistical guarantees , 2020, NeurIPS.

[8]  Aditya Krishna Menon,et al.  The cost of fairness in binary classification , 2018, FAT.

[9]  Percy Liang,et al.  Selective Classification Can Magnify Disparities Across Groups , 2020, ICLR.

[10]  Jean-Michel Loubes,et al.  Review of Mathematical frameworks for Fairness in Machine Learning , 2020, ArXiv.

[11]  L. Györfi,et al.  BAYESIAN DECISION WITH REJECTION. , 1979 .

[12]  Jing Lei Classification with confidence , 2014 .

[13]  Mohamed Hebiri,et al.  Consistency of plug-in confidence sets for classification in semi-supervised learning , 2015, Journal of Nonparametric Statistics.

[14]  John Langford,et al.  A Reductions Approach to Fair Classification , 2018, ICML.

[15]  Radu Herbei,et al.  Classification with reject option , 2006 .

[16]  Hanna M. Wallach,et al.  Fairlearn: A toolkit for assessing and improving fairness in AI , 2020 .

[17]  Olivier Bousquet,et al.  Fast classification rates without standard margin assumptions , 2019, ArXiv.

[18]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[19]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Predict Responsibly: Improving Fairness and Accuracy by Learning to Defer , 2017, NeurIPS.

[20]  W. Gasarch,et al.  The Book Review Column 1 Coverage Untyped Systems Simple Types Recursive Types Higher-order Systems General Impression 3 Organization, and Contents of the Book , 2022 .

[21]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Fairness Beyond Disparate Treatment & Disparate Impact: Learning Classification without Disparate Mistreatment , 2016, WWW.

[22]  Erwan Scornet,et al.  A random forest guided tour , 2015, TEST.

[23]  Nikita Zhivotovskiy,et al.  Exponential Savings in Agnostic Active Learning Through Abstention , 2021, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[24]  Miroslav Dudík,et al.  Fair Regression: Quantitative Definitions and Reduction-based Algorithms , 2019, ICML.

[25]  C. K. Chow,et al.  An optimum character recognition system using decision functions , 1957, IRE Trans. Electron. Comput..

[26]  Bernd Gärtner,et al.  Understanding and using linear programming , 2007, Universitext.

[27]  Sara van de Geer,et al.  Statistics for High-Dimensional Data: Methods, Theory and Applications , 2011 .

[28]  P. Massart The Tight Constant in the Dvoretzky-Kiefer-Wolfowitz Inequality , 1990 .

[29]  A. Tsybakov,et al.  Minimax theory of image reconstruction , 1993 .

[30]  Ron Kohavi,et al.  Scaling Up the Accuracy of Naive-Bayes Classifiers: A Decision-Tree Hybrid , 1996, KDD.

[31]  L. G. H. Cijan A polynomial algorithm in linear programming , 1979 .

[32]  C. J. Stone,et al.  Consistent Nonparametric Regression , 1977 .

[33]  Peter L. Bartlett,et al.  Classification with a Reject Option using a Hinge Loss , 2008, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[34]  Yin Tat Lee,et al.  Efficient Inverse Maintenance and Faster Algorithms for Linear Programming , 2015, 2015 IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[35]  Yves Grandvalet,et al.  Support Vector Machines with a Reject Option , 2008, NIPS.

[36]  Narendra Karmarkar,et al.  A new polynomial-time algorithm for linear programming , 1984, Comb..

[37]  A. Tsybakov,et al.  Fast learning rates for plug-in classifiers , 2007, 0708.2321.

[38]  Blaise Hanczar,et al.  Accuracy-Rejection Curves (ARCs) for Comparing Classification Methods with a Reject Option , 2009, MLSB.