Automatic machine learning systems can inadvertently accentuate and perpetuate inappropriate human biases. Past work on examining inappropriate biases has largely focused on just individual systems. Further, there is no benchmark dataset for examining inappropriate biases in systems. Here for the first time, we present the Equity Evaluation Corpus (EEC), which consists of 8,640 English sentences carefully chosen to tease out biases towards certain races and genders. We use the dataset to examine 219 automatic sentiment analysis systems that took part in a recent shared task, SemEval-2018 Task 1 'Affect in Tweets'. We find that several of the systems show statistically significant bias; that is, they consistently provide slightly higher sentiment intensity predictions for one race or one gender. We make the EEC freely available.
Recent studies have demonstrated that the systems trained on the human-written texts learn human-like biases @cite_18 @cite_17 . In general, any predictive model built on historical data may inadvertently inherit human biases based on gender, ethnicity, race, or religion @cite_8 @cite_11 . Discrimination-aware data mining focuses on measuring discrimination in data as well as on evaluating performance of discrimination-aware predictive models @cite_24 @cite_14 @cite_9 @cite_25 .
@cite_18 @cite_14 @cite_8 @cite_9 @cite_17 @cite_24 @cite_25 @cite_11
1904875463 2507358938 2886424491 2584117724
Nowadays, many decisions are made using predictive models built on historical data.Predictive models may systematically discriminate groups of people even if the computing process is fair and well-intentioned. Discrimination-aware data mining studies how to make predictive models free from discrimination, when historical data, on which they are built, may be biased, incomplete, or even contain past discriminatory decisions. Discrimination refers to disadvantageous treatment of a person based on belonging to a category rather than on individual merit. In this survey we review and organize various discrimination measures that have been used for measuring discrimination in data, as well as in evaluating performance of discrimination-aware predictive models. We also discuss related measures from other disciplines, which have not been used for measuring discrimination, but potentially could be suitable for this purpose. We computationally analyze properties of selected measures. We also review and discuss measuring procedures, and present recommendations for practitioners. The primary target audience is data mining, machine learning, pattern recognition, statistical modeling researchers developing new methods for non-discriminatory predictive modeling. In addition, practitioners and policy makers would use the survey for diagnosing potential discrimination by predictive models. Algorithms and decision making based on Big Data have become pervasive in all aspects of our daily lives lives (offline and online), as they have become essential tools in personal finance, health care, hiring, housing, education, and policies. It is therefore of societ al and ethical importance to ask whether these algorithms can be discriminative on grounds such as gender, ethnicity, or health status. It turns out that the answer is positive: for instance, recent studies in the context of online advertising show that ads for high-income jobs are presented to men much more often than to women [, 2015]; and ads for arrest records are significantly more likely to show up on searches for distinctively black names [Sweeney, 2013]. This algorithmic bias exists even when there is no discrimination intention in the developer of the algorithm. Sometimes it may be inherent to the data sources used (software making decisions based on data can reflect, or even amplify, the results of historical discrimination), but even when the sensitive attributes have been suppressed from the input, a well trained machine learning algorithm may still discriminate on the basis of such sensitive attributes because of correlations existing in the data. These considerations call for the development of data mining systems which are discrimination-conscious by-design. This is a novel and challenging research area for the data mining community. The aim of this tutorial is to survey algorithmic bias, presenting its most common variants, with an emphasis on the algorithmic techniques and key ideas developed to derive efficient solutions. The tutorial covers two main complementary approaches: algorithms for discrimination discovery and discrimination prevention by means of fairness-aware data mining. We conclude by summarizing promising paths for future research. Given a partial description like "she opened the hood of the car," humans can reason about the situation and anticipate what might come next ("then, she examined the engine"). In this paper, we introduce the task of grounded commonsense inference, unifying natural language inference and commonsense reasoning. We present SWAG, a new dataset with 113k multiple choice questions about a rich spectrum of grounded situations. To address the recurring challenges of the annotation artifacts and human biases found in many existing datasets, we propose Adversarial Filtering (AF), a novel procedure that constructs a de-biased dataset by iteratively training an ensemble of stylistic classifiers, and using them to filter the data. To account for the aggressive adversarial filtering, we use state-of-the-art language models to massively oversample a diverse set of potential counterfactuals. Empirical results demonstrate that while humans can solve the resulting inference problems with high accuracy (88 ), various competitive models struggle on our task. We provide comprehensive analysis that indicates significant opportunities for future research. When analysing human activities using data mining or machine learning techniques, it can be useful to infer properties such as the gender or age of the people involved. This paper focuses on the sub-problem of gender recognition, which has been studied extensively in the literature, with two main problems remaining unsolved: how to improve the accuracy on real-world face images, and how to generalise the models to perform well on new datasets. We address these problems by collecting five million weakly labelled face images, and performing three different experiments, investigating: the performance difference between convolutional neural networks (CNNs) of differing depths and a support vector machine approach using local binary pattern features on the same training data, the effect of contextual information on classification accuracy, and the ability of convolutional neural networks and large amounts of training data to generalise to cross-database classification. We report record-breaking results on both the Labeled Faces in the Wild (LFW) dataset, achieving an accuracy of 98.90 , and the Images of Groups (GROUPS) dataset, achieving an accuracy of 91.34 for cross-database gender classification.