



Abstract:Multi-agent systems have demonstrated the ability to improve performance on a variety of predictive tasks by leveraging collaborative decision making. However, the lack of effective evaluation methodologies has made it difficult to estimate the risk of bias, making deployment of such systems unsafe in high stakes domains such as consumer finance, where biased decisions can translate directly into regulatory breaches and financial loss. To address this challenge, we need to develop fairness evaluation methodologies for multi-agent predictive systems and measure the fairness characteristics of these systems in the financial tabular domain. Examining fairness metrics using large-scale simulations across diverse multi-agent configurations, with varying communication and collaboration mechanisms, we reveal patterns of emergent bias in financial decision-making that cannot be traced to individual agent components, indicating that multi-agent systems may exhibit genuinely collective behaviors. Our findings highlight that fairness risks in financial multi-agent systems represent a significant component of model risk, with tangible impacts on tasks such as credit scoring and income estimation. We advocate that multi-agent decision systems must be evaluated as holistic entities rather than through reductionist analyses of their constituent components.
Abstract:Pre-trained foundation models can be adapted for specific tasks using Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA). However, the fairness properties of these adapted classifiers remain underexplored. Existing fairness-aware fine-tuning methods rely on direct access to sensitive attributes or their predictors, but in practice, these sensitive attributes are often held under strict consumer privacy controls, and neither the attributes nor their predictors are available to model developers, hampering the development of fair models. To address this issue, we introduce a set of LoRA-based fine-tuning methods that can be trained in a distributed fashion, where model developers and fairness auditors collaborate without sharing sensitive attributes or predictors. In this paper, we evaluate three such methods - sensitive unlearning, adversarial training, and orthogonality loss - against a fairness-unaware baseline, using experiments on the CelebA and UTK-Face datasets with an ImageNet pre-trained ViT-Base model. We find that orthogonality loss consistently reduces bias while maintaining or improving utility, whereas adversarial training improves False Positive Rate Parity and Demographic Parity in some cases, and sensitive unlearning provides no clear benefit. In tasks where significant biases are present, distributed fairness-aware fine-tuning methods can effectively eliminate bias without compromising consumer privacy and, in most cases, improve model utility.