Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: An Excursion Through the Lens of Causality

ABSTRACT

As virtually all aspects of our lives are increasingly impacted by algorithmic decision making systems, it is incumbent upon us as a society to ensure such systems do not become instruments of unfair discrimination on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, religion, etc. We consider the problem of determining whether the decisions made by such systems are discriminatory, through the lens of causal models. We introduce two definitions of group fairness grounded in causality: fair on average causal effect (FACE), and fair on average causal effect on the treated (FACT). We use the Rubin-Neyman potential outcomes framework for the analysis of cause-effect relationships to robustly estimate FACE and FACT. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed approach on synthetic data. Our analyses of two real-world data sets, the Adult income data set from the UCI repository (with gender as the protected attribute), and the NYC Stop and Frisk data set (with race as the protected attribute), show that the evidence of discrimination obtained by FACE and FACT, or lack thereof, is often in agreement with the findings from other studies. We further show that FACT, being somewhat more nuanced compared to FACE, can yield findings of discrimination that differ from those obtained using FACE.

References

1. C. Barabas, M. Virza, K. Dinakar, J. Ito, and J. Zittrain. 2018. Interventions over Predictions: Reframing the Ethical Debate for Actuarial Risk Assessment. In Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency. 62-76.
2. S. Barocas, E. Bradley, V. Honavar, and F. Provost. 2017. Big Data, Data Science, and Civil Rights. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.03102(2017).
3. S. Barocas and A. D. Selbst. 2016. Big data's disparate impact. Cal. L. Rev. 104(2016), 671.
4. R. Berk, H. Heidari, S. Jabbari, M. Kearns, and A. Roth. 2017. Fairness in criminal justice risk assessments: the state of the art. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.09207(2017).
5. F. Bonchi, S. Hajian, B. Mishra, and D. Ramazzotti. 2017. Exposing the probabilistic causal structure of discrimination. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics 3, 1 (2017), 1-21.
6. T. Calders, F. Kamiran, and M. Pechenizkiy. 2009. Building classifiers with independency constraints. In Data mining workshops, 2009. ICDMW'09. IEEE international conference on. IEEE, 13-18.
7. S. Chiappa and T. PS. Gillam. 2018. Path-specific counterfactual fairness. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.08139(2018).
8. A. Chouldechova. 2017. Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments. Big data 5, 2 (2017), 153-163.
9. D. R. Cox. 1958. Planning of experiments.(1958).
10. D. Dheeru and E. Karra Taniskidou. 2017. UCI Machine Learning Repository. http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml
11. C. Dwork, M. Hardt, T. Pitassi, O. Reingold, and R. Zemel. 2012. Fairness through awareness. In Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference. ACM, 214-226.
12. C. Dwork and C. Ilvento. 2018. Fairness Under Composition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.06122(2018).
13. M. Feldman, S. A. Friedler, J. Moeller, C. Scheidegger, and S. Venkatasubramanian. 2015. Certifying and removing disparate impact. In Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 259-268.
14. N. Grgic-Hlaca, M. B. Zafar, K. P. Gummadi, and A. Weller. 2016. The case for process fairness in learning: Feature selection for fair decision making. In NIPS Symposium on Machine Learning and the Law, Vol. 1. 2.
15. M. Hardt, E. Price, and N. Srebro. 2016. Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 3315-3323.
16. M. A. Hernan and J. M. Robins. 2018. Causal Inference. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC, forthcoming.
17. D. E. Ho, K. Imai, G. King, and E. A. Stuart. 2011. MatchIt: nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference. Journal of Statistical Software 42, 8 (2011), 1-28.
18. P. W. Holland. 1986. Statistics and Causal Inference. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 81, 396 (1986), 945-960.
19. K. Imai, G. King, and E. Stuart. 2008. Misunderstandings Among Experimentalists and Observationalists about Causal Inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 171, part 2 (2008), 481-502.
20. G. W. Imbens and D. B. Rubin. 2015. Causal inference in statistics, social, and biomedical sciences. Cambridge University Press.
21. J. E. Johndrow and K. Lum. 2017. An algorithm for removing sensitive information: application to race-independent recidivism prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.04957(2017).
22. F. Kamiran and T. Calders. 2009. Classifying without discriminating. In Computer, Control and Communication. IC4 2009. 2nd International Conference on. IEEE, 1-6.
23. T. Kamishima, S. Akaho, H. Asoh, and J. Sakuma. 2012. Fairness-aware classifier with prejudice remover regularizer. In Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Springer, 35-50.
24. L. Keele. 2010. An overview of rbounds: An R package for Rosenbaum bounds sensitivity analysis with matched data. White Paper. Columbus, OH(2010), 1-15.
25. N. Kilbertus, M. R. Carulla, G. Parascandolo, M. Hardt, D. Janzing, and B. Schölkopf. 2017. Avoiding discrimination through causal reasoning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 656-666.
26. J. Kleinberg, S. Mullainathan, and M. Raghavan. 2016. Inherent trade-offs in the fair determination of risk scores. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.05807(2016).
27. R. Kohavi. 1996. Scaling Up the Accuracy of Naive-Bayes Classifiers: a Decision-Tree Hybrid. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Vol. 96. 202-207.
28. M. J. Kusner, J. Loftus, C. Russell, and R. Silva. 2017. Counterfactual fairness. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 4069-4079.
29. M. J. Kusner, C. Russell, J. R. Loftus, and R. Silva. 2018. Causal Interventions for Fairness. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.02380(2018).
30. J. Li, J. Liu, L. Liu, T. D. Le, S. Ma, and Y. Han. 2017. Discrimination detection by causal effect estimation. In Big Data (Big Data), 2017 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 1087-1094.
31. W. Liu, S. J. Kuramoto, and E. A. Stuart. 2013. An introduction to sensitivity analysis for unobserved confounding in nonexperimental prevention research. Prevention Science 14, 6 (2013), 570-580.
32. J. R. Loftus, C. Russell, M. J. Kusner, and R. Silva. 2018. Causal Reasoning for Algorithmic Fairness. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.05859(2018).
33. C. Louizos, K. Swersky, Y. Li, M. Welling, and R. Zemel. 2015. The variational fair autoencoder. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.00830(2015).
34. D. Madras, E. Creager, T. Pitassi, and R. Zemel. 2019. Fairness through Causal Awareness: Learning Causal Latent-Variable Models for Biased Data. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. ACM, 349-358.
35. R. Nabi and I. Shpitser. 2018. Fair inference on outcomes. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2018. NIH Public Access, 1931.
36. J. Pearl. 2009. Causality. Cambridge university press.
37. J. Pearl. 2010. The foundations of causal inference. Sociological Methodology 40, 1 (2010), 75-149.
38. J. Pearl. 2019. On the Interpretation of do(x). Journal of Causal Inference, forthcoming(2019).
39. J. M. Robins, M. A. Hernán, and B. Brumback. 2000. Marginal Structural Models and Causal Inference in Epidemiology. Epidemiology 11, 5 (2000), 550-560.
40. A. Romei and S. Ruggieri. 2014. A multidisciplinary survey on discrimination analysis. The Knowledge Engineering Review 29, 5 (2014), 582-638.
41. P. R. Rosenbaum. 1991. A characterization of optimal designs for observational studies. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) (1991), 597-610.
42. P. R. Rosenbaum. 2005. Sensitivity analysis in observational studies. Encyclopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science 4 (2005), 1809-1814.
43. P. R. Rosenbaum and D. B. Rubin. 1983. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70, 1 (1983), 41-55.
44. P. R. Rosenbaum and D. B. Rubin. 1985. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician 39, 1 (1985), 33-38.
45. D. B. Rubin. 1974. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies.Journal of Educational Psychology 66, 5 (1974), 688.
46. D. B. Rubin. 1978. Bayesian inference for causal effects: The role of randomization. The Annals of statistics(1978), 34-58.
47. D. B. Rubin. 1980. Randomization analysis of experimental data: The Fisher randomization test comment. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 75, 371 (1980), 591-593.
48. D. B. Rubin. 2001. Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: application to the tobacco litigation. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology 2, 3-4(2001), 169-188.
49. D. B. Rubin. 2005. Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 100, 469 (2005), 322-331.
50. C. Russell, M. J. Kusner, J. Loftus, and R. Silva. 2017. When worlds collide: integrating different counterfactual assumptions in fairness. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 6417-6426.
51. E. A. Stuart. 2010. Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science: a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics 25, 1 (2010), 1.
52. W. M. van der Wal, R. B. Geskus, 2011. Ipw: an R package for inverse probability weighting. J Stat Softw 43, 13 (2011), 1-23.
53. T. J. VanderWeele and W. R. Robinson. 2014. On causal interpretation of race in regressions adjusting for confounding and mediating variables. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) 25, 4 (2014), 473.
54. M. B. Zafar, I. Valera, M. G. Rodriguez, and K. P. Gummadi. 2017. Fairness beyond disparate treatment & disparate impact: Learning classification without disparate mistreatment. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 1171-1180.
55. M. B. Zafar, I. Valera, M. G. Rogriguez, and K. P. Gummadi. 2017. Fairness Constraints: Mechanisms for Fair Classification. In Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. 962-970.
56. R. Zemel, Y. Wu, K. Swersky, T. Pitassi, and C. Dwork. 2013. Learning fair representations. In International Conference on Machine Learning. 325-333.
57. J. Zhang and E. Bareinboim. 2018. Fairness in Decision-Making-The Causal Explanation Formula. In 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
58. L. Zhang, Y. Wu, and X. Wu. 2016. Situation testing-based discrimination discovery: a causal inference approach. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 2718-2724.
59. L. Zhang, Y. Wu, and X. Wu. 2017. A Causal Framework for Discovering and Removing Direct and Indirect Discrimination. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
60. I. Zliobaite. 2015. A survey on measuring indirect discrimination in machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.00148(2015).