A Justice-Based Framework for the Analysis of Algorithmic Fairness-Utility Trade-Offs
In prediction-based decision-making systems, different perspectives can be at
odds: The short-term business goals of the decision makers are often in
conflict with the decision subjects' wish to be treated fairly. Balancing these
two perspectives is a question of values. We provide a framework to make these
value-laden choices clearly visible. For this, we assume that we are given a
trained model and want to find decision rules that balance the perspective of
the decision maker and of the decision subjects. We provide an approach to
formalize both perspectives, i.e., to assess the utility of the decision maker
and the fairness towards the decision subjects. In both cases, the idea is to
elicit values from decision makers and decision subjects that are then turned
into something measurable. For the fairness evaluation, we build on the
literature on welfare-based fairness and ask what a fair distribution of
utility (or welfare) looks like. In this step, we build on well-known theories
of distributive justice. This allows us to derive a fairness score that we then
compare to the decision maker's utility for many different decision rules. This
way, we provide an approach for balancing the utility of the decision maker and
the fairness towards the decision subjects for a prediction-based
decision-making system.