Fairness of Classification Using Users’ Social Relationships in Online Peer-To-Peer Lending

Peer-to-peer (P2P) lending marketplaces on the Web have been growing over the last decade. By providing online platforms, P2P lending enables individuals to borrow and lend money directly from and to one another. Since the applicants on P2P lending platforms may lack sufficient financial history for assessment, quite a few P2P lending service providers have been utilizing the applicants’ social relationships to improve the risk prediction accuracy of loan applications. However, utilizing the information of applicants’ social relationships may introduce discrimination in prediction. In this paper, we analyze and evaluate the impact of the applicants’ social relationships on the fairness of risk prediction for P2P lending. We investigate over a million loan records collected from Prosper.com, one of the leading P2P lending companies in the world. We construct the Prosper social network of loan borrowers and lenders, and generate the social features of applicants by adapting a state-of-the-art social credit scoring scheme to the Prosper social network. We consider two types of fairness notions in the literature, namely individual fairness and counterfactual fairness. Our results demonstrate that the social score harms both individual and counterfactual fairness of classification. To address this issue, we design two new algorithms that mitigate bias by generalizing social features. Our experimental results show that our mitigation algorithms can reduce bias while utilizing social scores effectively.

[1]  Yingjie Zhang,et al.  The Value of Alternative Data in Credit Risk Prediction: Evidence from a Large Field Experiment , 2019, ICIS.

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

[3]  Carlos Eduardo Scheidegger,et al.  Certifying and Removing Disparate Impact , 2014, KDD.

[4]  Chrysanthos Dellarocas,et al.  Credit Scoring with Social Network Data , 2014, Mark. Sci..

[5]  G. Jin,et al.  Do Social Networks Solve Information Problems for Peer-to-Peer Lending? Evidence from Prosper.Com , 2008 .

[6]  Dirk Van den Poel,et al.  Improving customer retention in financial services using kinship network information , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[7]  Nathan Srebro,et al.  Learning Non-Discriminatory Predictors , 2017, COLT.

[8]  Novi Quadrianto,et al.  Recycling Privileged Learning and Distribution Matching for Fairness , 2017, NIPS.

[9]  Siva Viswanathan,et al.  Judging Borrowers by the Company They Keep: Friendship Networks and Information Asymmetry in Online Peer-to-Peer Lending , 2011, Manag. Sci..

[10]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  The Case for Process Fairness in Learning: Feature Selection for Fair Decision Making , 2016 .

[11]  Jun Sakuma,et al.  Fairness-Aware Classifier with Prejudice Remover Regularizer , 2012, ECML/PKDD.

[12]  Ankur Taly,et al.  Counterfactual Fairness in Text Classification through Robustness , 2018, AIES.

[13]  Marc J. Schniederjans,et al.  Enhancing financial performance with social media: An impression management perspective , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..

[14]  Toon Calders,et al.  Three naive Bayes approaches for discrimination-free classification , 2010, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery.

[15]  S. Viswanathan,et al.  Judging Borrowers by the Company They Keep : Social Networks and Adverse Selection in Online Peer-to-Peer Lending , 2009 .

[16]  Alexandra Chouldechova,et al.  Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments , 2016, Big Data.

[17]  Yansong Hu,et al.  Nonmonotonic Status Effects in New Product Adoption , 2014, Mark. Sci..

[18]  Toon Calders,et al.  Building Classifiers with Independency Constraints , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops.

[19]  M. Haenlein A social network analysis of customer-level revenue distribution , 2011 .

[20]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Fairness through awareness , 2011, ITCS '12.

[21]  Chunguang Zhou,et al.  Credit scoring algorithm based on link analysis ranking with support vector machine , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[22]  Toon Calders,et al.  Classifying without discriminating , 2009, 2009 2nd International Conference on Computer, Control and Communication.

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

[24]  Matt J. Kusner,et al.  Counterfactual Fairness , 2017, NIPS.

[25]  Michael Chui Social media to boost financial services , 2013 .

[26]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores , 2016, ITCS.

[27]  Vladimir Vapnik,et al.  A new learning paradigm: Learning using privileged information , 2009, Neural Networks.

[28]  G. Jin,et al.  Do Social Networks Solve Information Problems for Peer-to-Peer Lending? Evidence from Prosper.Com , 2008 .

[29]  Maya R. Gupta,et al.  Satisfying Real-world Goals with Dataset Constraints , 2016, NIPS.