Data mining for discrimination discovery

Abstract

In the context of civil rights law, discrimination refers to unfair or unequal treatment of people based on membership to a category or a minority, without regard to individual merit. Discrimination in credit, mortgage, insurance, labor market, and education has been investigated by researchers in economics and human sciences. With the advent of automatic decision support systems, such as credit scoring systems, the ease of data collection opens several challenges to data analysts for the fight against discrimination. In this article, we introduce the problem of discovering discrimination through data mining in a dataset of historical decision records, taken by humans or by automatic systems. We formalize the processes of direct and indirect discrimination discovery by modelling protected-by-law groups and contexts where discrimination occurs in a classification rule based syntax. Basically, classification rules extracted from the dataset allow for unveiling contexts of unlawful discrimination, where the degree of burden over protected-by-law groups is formalized by an extension of the lift measure of a classification rule. In direct discrimination, the extracted rules can be directly mined in search of discriminatory contexts. In indirect discrimination, the mining process needs some background knowledge as a further input, for example, census data, that combined with the extracted rules might allow for unveiling contexts of discriminatory decisions. A strategy adopted for combining extracted classification rules with background knowledge is called an inference model. In this article, we propose two inference models and provide automatic procedures for their implementation. An empirical assessment of our results is provided on the German credit dataset and on the PKDD Discovery Challenge 1999 financial dataset.

References

1. Agrawal, R. and Srikant, R. 1994. Fast algorithms for mining association rules in large databases. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Very Large Databases. Morgan Kaufmann, 487--499.
2. Agrawal, R. and Srikant, R. 2000. Privacy-preserving data mining. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data. ACM, 439--450.
3. Australian Legislation. 2009. (a) Equal Opportunity Act—Victoria State, (b) Anti-Discrimination Act—Queensland State. http://www.austlii.edu.au.
4. Baesens, B., Gestel, T. V., Viaene, S., Stepanova, M., Suykens, J., and Vanthienen, J. 2003. Benchmarking state-of-the-art classification algorithms for credit scoring. J. Oper. Resear. Soc. 54, 6, 627--635.
5. Becker, G. S. 1957. The Economics of Discrimination. University of Chicago Press.
6. Berka, P. 1999. PKDD 1999 discovery challenge. http://lisp.vse.cz/challenge.
7. Chien, C.-F. and Chen, L. 2008. Data mining to improve personnel selection and enhance human capital: A case study in high-technology industry. Exp. Syst. Appl. 34, 1, 280--290.
8. Clifton, C. 2003. Privacy preserving data mining: How do we mine data when we aren't allowed to see it? In Procedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Tutorial. http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/clifton.
9. European Union Legislation. 2009. (a) Racial Equality Directive, (b) Employment Equality Directive. http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights.
10. Gastwirth, J. L. 1992. Statistical reasoning in the legal setting. Amer. Statist. 46, 1, 55--69.
11. Goethals, B. 2009. Frequent itemset mining implementations repository. http://fimi.cs.helsinki.fi.
12. Hand, D. J. 2001. Modelling consumer credit risk. IMA J. Manag. Math. 12, 139--155.
13. Hand, D. J. and Henley, W. E. 1997. Statistical classification methods in consumer credit scoring: A review. J. Royal Statist. Soc. Series A 160, 523--541.
14. Harford, T. 2008. Logic of Life. The Random House.
15. Hintoglu, A. A., Inan, A., Saygin, Y., and Keskinöz, M. 2005. Suppressing data sets to prevent discovery of association rules. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE Computer Society, 645--648.
16. Holzer, H., Raphael, S., and Stoll, M. 2004. Black job applicants and the hiring officer's race. Industr. Labor Relat. Rev. 57, 2, 267--287.
17. Holzer, H. J. and Neumark, D. 2006. Affirmative action: What do we know? J. Policy Anal. Manag. 25, 463--490.
18. Hunter, R. 1992. Indirect Discrimination in the Workplace. The Federation Press.
19. Kamiran, F. and Calders, T. 2009. Classification without discrimination. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer, Control & Communication. IEEE Press.
20. Kaye, D. and Aickin, M., Eds. 1992. Statistical Methods in Discrimination Litigation. Marcel Dekker, Inc.
21. Knopff, R. 1986. On proving discrimination: Statistical methods and unfolding policy logics. Canad. Pub. Policy 12, 573--583.
22. Knuth, D. 1997. Fundamental Algorithms. Addison-Wesley.
23. Kuhn, P. 1987. Sex discrimination in labor markets: The role of statistical evidence. Amer. Econ. Rev. 77, 567--583.
24. LaCour-Little, M. 1999. Discrimination in mortgage lending: A critical review of the literature. J. Real Estate Lit. 7, 15--50.
25. Liu, B., Hsu, W., and Ma, Y. 1998. Integrating classification and association rule mining. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. AAAI Press, 80--86.
26. Liu, K. 2009. Privacy preserving data mining bibliography. http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~kunliu1/research/privacy_review.html.
27. Makkonen, T. 2007. Measuring discrimination: Data collection and the EU equality law. http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights.
28. Newman, D., Hettich, S., Blake, C., and Merz, C. 1998. UCI repository of machine learning databases. http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml.
29. Pedreschi, D., Ruggieri, S., and Turini, F. 2008. Discrimination-aware data mining. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 560--568.
30. Pedreschi, D., Ruggieri, S., and Turini, F. 2009. Measuring discrimination in socially-sensitive decision records. In Proceedings of the SIAM International Conference on Data Mining. SIAM, 581--592.
31. Piette, M. J. and White, P. F. 1999. Approaches for dealing with small sample sizes in employment discrimination litigation. J. Foren. Econ. 12, 43--56.
32. Rauch, J. 2005. Logic of association rules. Appl. Intell. 22, 1, 9--28.
33. Rauch, J. and Simunek, M. 2001. Mining for association rules by 4ft-Miner. In Proceedings of the INAP 2001. Prolog Association of Japan, 285--295.
34. Rauch, J. and Simunek, M. 2009. 4-ft Miner Procedure. http://lispminer.vse.cz.
35. Riach, P. A. and Rich, J. 2002. Field experiments of discrimination in the market place. Econ. J. 112, 480--518.
36. Squires, G. D. 2003. Racial profiling, insurance style: Insurance redlining and the uneven development of metropolitan areas. J. Urban Affairs 25, 4, 391--410.
37. Srikant, R. and Agrawal, R. 1995. Mining generalized association rules. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Very Large Databases. Morgan Kaufmann, 407--419.
38. Sweeney, L. 2001. Computational disclosure control: A primer on data privacy protection. Ph.D. thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
39. Sweeney, L. 2002. Achieving k-anonymity privacy protection using generalization and suppression. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzz. Knowl.-Bas. Syst. 10, 5, 571--588.
40. Tan, P.-N., Kumar, V., and Srivastava, J. 2004. Selecting the right objective measure for association analysis. Inform. Syst. 29, 4, 293--313.
41. Thomas, L. C. 2000. A survey of credit and behavioural scoring: Forecasting financial risk of lending to consumers. Int. J. Forecast. 16, 149--172.
42. U.K. Legislation. 2009. (a) Sex Discrimination Act, (b) Race Relation Act. http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk.
43. U.S. Federal Legislation. 2009. (a) Equal Credit Opportunity Act, (b) Fair Housing Act, (c) Intentional Employment Discrimination, (d) Equal Pay Act, (e) Pregnancy Discrimination Act. http://www.usdoj.gov.
44. Vaidya, J., Clifton, C. W., and Zhu, Y. M. 2006. Privacy Preserving Data Mining. Advances in Information Security. Springer.
45. Verykios, V. S., Elmagarmid, A. K., Bertino, E., Saygin, Y., and Dasseni, E. 2004. Association rule hiding. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Engin. 16, 4, 434--447.
46. Viaene, S., Derrig, R. A., Baesens, B., and Dedene, G. 2001. A comparison of state-of-the-art classification techniques for expert automobile insurance claim fraud detection. J. Risk Insur. 69, 3, 373--421.
47. Vojtek, M. and Kočenda, E. 2006. Credit scoring methods. J. Econ. Finance 56, 152--167.
48. Wang, K., Fung, B. C. M., and Yu, P. S. 2005. Template-based privacy preservation in classification problems. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE Computer Society, 466--473.
49. Wu, X., Zhang, C., and Zhang, S. 2004. Efficient mining of both positive and negative association rules. ACM Trans. Inform. Syst. 22, 3, 381--405.
50. Yin, X. and Han, J. 2003. CPAR: Classification based on Predictive Association Rules. In Proceedings of the SIAM International Conference on Data Mining. SIAM, 331--335.

Index Terms

• Information systems

  • Information systems applications

    • Data mining