Fairness-aware learning is increasingly important in data mining. Discrimination prevention aims to prevent discrimination in the training data before it is used to conduct predictive analysis. In this paper, we focus on fair data generation that ensures the generated data is discrimination free. Inspired by generative adversarial networks (GAN), we present fairness-aware generative adversarial networks, called FairGAN, which are able to learn a generator producing fair data and also preserving good data utility. Compared with the naive fair data generation models, FairGAN further ensures the classifiers which are trained on generated data can achieve fair classification on real data. Experiments on a real dataset show the effectiveness of FairGAN.
We study fairness in classification, where individuals are classified, e.g., admitted to a university, and the goal is to prevent discrimination against individuals based on their membership in some group, while maintaining utility for the classifier (the university). The main conceptual contribution of this paper is a framework for fair classification comprising (1) a (hypothetical) task-specific metric for determining the degree to which individuals are similar with respect to the classification task at hand; (2) an algorithm for maximizing utility subject to the fairness constraint, that similar individuals are treated similarly. We also present an adaptation of our approach to achieve the complementary goal of "fair affirmative action," which guarantees statistical parity (i.e., the demographics of the set of individuals receiving any classification are the same as the demographics of the underlying population), while treating similar individuals as similarly as possible. Finally, we discuss the relationship of fairness to privacy: when fairness implies privacy, and how tools developed in the context of differential privacy may be applied to fairness.  Recently, the following discrimination aware classification problem was introduced: given a labeled dataset and an attribute B, find a classifier with high predictive accuracy that at the same time does not discriminate on the basis of the given attribute B. This problem is motivated by the fact that often available historic data is biased due to discrimination, e.g., when B denotes ethnicity. Using the standard learners on this data may lead to wrongfully biased classifiers, even if the attribute B is removed from training data. Existing solutions for this problem consist in “cleaning away” the discrimination from the dataset before a classifier is learned. In this paper we study an alternative approach in which the non-discrimination constraint is pushed deeply into a decision tree learner by changing its splitting criterion and pruning strategy. Experimental evaluation shows that the proposed approach advances the state-of-the-art in the sense that the learned decision trees have a lower discrimination than models provided by previous methods, with little loss in accuracy. In this paper we study the problem of classifier learning where the input data contains unjustified dependencies between some data attributes and the class label. Such cases arise for example when the training data is collected from different sources with different labeling criteria or when the data is generated by a biased decision process. When a classifier is trained directly on such data, these undesirable dependencies will carry over to the classifier’s predictions. In order to tackle this problem, we study the classification with independency constraints problem: find an accurate model for which the predictions are independent from a given binary attribute. We propose two solutions for this problem and present an empirical validation. With the spread of data mining technologies and the accumulation of social data, such technologies and data are being used for determinations that seriously affect people's lives. For example, credit scoring is frequently determined based on the records of past credit data together with statistical prediction techniques. Needless to say, such determinations must be socially and legally fair from a viewpoint of social responsibility, namely, it must be unbiased and nondiscriminatory in sensitive features, such as race, gender, religion, and so on. Several researchers have recently begun to attempt the development of analysis techniques that are aware of social fairness or discrimination. They have shown that simply avoiding the use of sensitive features is insufficient for eliminating biases in determinations, due to the indirect influence of sensitive information. From a privacy-preserving viewpoint, this can be interpreted as hiding sensitive information when classification results are observed. In this paper, we first discuss three causes of unfairness in machine learning. We then propose a regularization approach that is applicable to any prediction algorithm with probabilistic discriminative models. We further apply this approach to logistic regression and empirically show its effectiveness and efficiency. We propose a criterion for discrimination against a specified sensitive attribute in supervised learning, where the goal is to predict some target based on available features. Assuming data about the predictor, target, and membership in the protected group are available, we show how to optimally adjust any learned predictor so as to remove discrimination according to our definition. Our framework also improves incentives by shifting the cost of poor classification from disadvantaged groups to the decision maker, who can respond by improving the classification accuracy. We enourage readers to consult the more complete manuscript on the arXiv.  What does it mean for an algorithm to be biased? In U.S. law, unintentional bias is encoded via disparate impact, which occurs when a selection process has widely different outcomes for different groups, even as it appears to be neutral. This legal determination hinges on a definition of a protected class (ethnicity, gender) and an explicit description of the process. When computers are involved, determining disparate impact (and hence bias) is harder. It might not be possible to disclose the process. In addition, even if the process is open, it might be hard to elucidate in a legal setting how the algorithm makes its decisions. Instead of requiring access to the process, we propose making inferences based on the data it uses. We present four contributions. First, we link disparate impact to a measure of classification accuracy that while known, has received relatively little attention. Second, we propose a test for disparate impact based on how well the protected class can be predicted from the other attributes. Third, we describe methods by which data might be made unbiased. Finally, we present empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of our test for disparate impact and our approach for both masking bias and preserving relevant information in the data. Interestingly, our approach resembles some actual selection practices that have recently received legal scrutiny.