Estimating and Controlling for Fairness via Sensitive Attribute Predictors

Although machine learning classifiers have been increasingly used in high-stakes decision making (e.g., cancer diagnosis, criminal prosecution decisions), they have demonstrated biases against underrepresented groups. Standard definitions of fairness require access to sensitive attributes of interest (e.g., gender and race), which are often unavailable. In this work we demonstrate that in these settings where sensitive attributes are unknown, one can still reliably estimate and ultimately control for fairness by using proxy sensitive attributes derived from a sensitive attribute predictor. Specifically, we first show that with just a little knowledge of the complete data distribution, one may use a sensitive attribute predictor to obtain upper and lower bounds of the classifier's true fairness metric. Second, we demonstrate how one can provably control for fairness with respect to the true sensitive attributes by controlling for fairness with respect to the proxy sensitive attributes. Our results hold under assumptions that are significantly milder than previous works. We illustrate our results on a series of synthetic and real datasets.

From Shapley back to Pearson: Hypothesis Testing via the Shapley Value

Machine learning models, in particular artificial neural networks, are increasingly used to inform decision making in high-stakes scenarios across a variety of fields--from financial services, to public safety, and healthcare. While neural networks have achieved remarkable performance in many settings, their complex nature raises concerns on their reliability, trustworthiness, and fairness in real-world scenarios. As a result, several a-posteriori explanation methods have been proposed to highlight the features that influence a model's prediction. Notably, the Shapley value--a game theoretic quantity that satisfies several desirable properties--has gained popularity in the machine learning explainability literature. More traditionally, however, feature importance in statistical learning has been formalized by conditional independence, and a standard way to test for it is via Conditional Randomization Tests (CRTs). So far, these two perspectives on interpretability and feature importance have been considered distinct and separate. In this work, we show that Shapley-based explanation methods and conditional independence testing for feature importance are closely related. More precisely, we prove that evaluating a Shapley coefficient amounts to performing a specific set of conditional independence tests, as implemented by a procedure similar to the CRT but for a different null hypothesis. Furthermore, the obtained game-theoretic values upper bound the $p$-values of such tests. As a result, we grant large Shapley coefficients with a precise statistical sense of importance with controlled type I error.