From If-Statements to ML Pipelines: Revisiting Bias in Code-Generation

Prior work evaluates code generation bias primarily through simple conditional statements, which represent only a narrow slice of real-world programming and reveal solely overt, explicitly encoded bias. We demonstrate that this approach dramatically underestimates bias in practice by examining a more realistic task: generating machine learning (ML) pipelines. Testing both code-specialized and general-instruction large language models, we find that generated pipelines exhibit significant bias during feature selection. Sensitive attributes appear in 87.7% of cases on average, despite models demonstrably excluding irrelevant features (e.g., including "race" while dropping "favorite color" for credit scoring). This bias is substantially more prevalent than that captured by conditional statements, where sensitive attributes appear in only 59.2% of cases. These findings are robust across prompt mitigation strategies, varying numbers of attributes, and different pipeline difficulty levels. Our results challenge simple conditionals as valid proxies for bias evaluation and suggest current benchmarks underestimate bias risk in practical deployments.

Rashomon Sets and Model Multiplicity in Federated Learning

The Rashomon set captures the collection of models that achieve near-identical empirical performance yet may differ substantially in their decision boundaries. Understanding the differences among these models, i.e., their multiplicity, is recognized as a crucial step toward model transparency, fairness, and robustness, as it reveals decision boundaries instabilities that standard metrics obscure. However, the existing definitions of Rashomon set and multiplicity metrics assume centralized learning and do not extend naturally to decentralized, multi-party settings like Federated Learning (FL). In FL, multiple clients collaboratively train models under a central server's coordination without sharing raw data, which preserves privacy but introduces challenges from heterogeneous client data distribution and communication constraints. In this setting, the choice of a single best model may homogenize predictive behavior across diverse clients, amplify biases, or undermine fairness guarantees. In this work, we provide the first formalization of Rashomon sets in FL.First, we adapt the Rashomon set definition to FL, distinguishing among three perspectives: (I) a global Rashomon set defined over aggregated statistics across all clients, (II) a t-agreement Rashomon set representing the intersection of local Rashomon sets across a fraction t of clients, and (III) individual Rashomon sets specific to each client's local distribution.Second, we show how standard multiplicity metrics can be estimated under FL's privacy constraints. Finally, we introduce a multiplicity-aware FL pipeline and conduct an empirical study on standard FL benchmark datasets. Our results demonstrate that all three proposed federated Rashomon set definitions offer valuable insights, enabling clients to deploy models that better align with their local data, fairness considerations, and practical requirements.