ICML 2023 论文列表

Streaming submodular maximization is a natural model for the task of selecting a representative subset from a large-scale dataset. If datapoints have sensitive attributes such as gender or race, it becomes important to enforce fairness to avoid bias and discrimination. This has spurred significant interest in developing fair machine learning algorithms. Recently, such algorithms have been developed for monotone submodular maximization under a cardinality constraint. In this paper, we study the natural generalization of this problem to a matroid constraint. We give streaming algorithms as well as impossibility results that provide trade-offs between efficiency, quality and fairness. We validate our findings empirically on a range of well-known real-world applications: exemplar-based clustering, movie recommendation, and maximum coverage in social networks.

There are strong incentives to build classification systems that show outstanding performance on various datasets and benchmarks. This can encourage a narrow focus on models and the performance metrics used to evaluate and compare them—resulting in a growing body of literature to evaluate and compare _metrics_. This paper strives for a more balanced perspective on binary classifier performance metrics by showing how uncertainty in these metrics can easily eclipse differences in empirical performance. We emphasise the discrete nature of confusion matrices and show how they can be well represented in a 3D lattice whose cross-sections form the space of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. We develop novel interactive visualisations of performance metric contours within (and beyond) ROC space, showing the discrete probability mass functions of true and false positive rates and how these relate to performance metric distributions. We aim to raise awareness of the substantial uncertainty in performance metric estimates that can arise when classifiers are evaluated on empirical datasets and benchmarks, and that performance claims should be tempered by this understanding.

We consider the problem of subset selection where one is given multiple rankings of items and the goal is to select the highest "quality" subset. Score functions from the multiwinner voting literature have been used to aggregate rankings into quality scores for subsets. We study this setting of subset selection problems when, in addition, rankings may contain systemic or unconscious biases toward a group of items. For a general model of input rankings and biases, we show that requiring the selected subset to satisfy group fairness constraints can improve the quality of the selection with respect to unbiased rankings. Importantly, we show that for fairness constraints to be effective, different multiwinner score functions may require a drastically different number of rankings: While for some functions, fairness constraints need an exponential number of rankings to recover a close-to-optimal solution, for others, this dependency is only polynomial. This result relies on a novel notion of "smoothness" of submodular functions in this setting that quantifies how well a function can "correctly" assess the quality of items in the presence of bias. The results in this paper can be used to guide the choice of multiwinner score functions for the subset selection setting considered here; we additionally provide a tool to empirically enable this.

Screening classifiers are increasingly used to identify qualified candidates in a variety of selection processes. In this context, it has been recently shown that if a classifier is calibrated, one can identify the smallest set of candidates which contains, in expectation, a desired number of qualified candidates using a threshold decision rule. This lends support to focusing on calibration as the only requirement for screening classifiers. In this paper, we argue that screening policies that use calibrated classifiers may suffer from an understudied type of within-group unfairness---they may unfairly treat qualified members within demographic groups of interest. Further, we argue that this type of unfairness can be avoided if classifiers satisfy within-group monotonicity, a natural monotonicity property within each group. Then, we introduce an efficient post-processing algorithm based on dynamic programming to minimally modify a given calibrated classifier so that its probability estimates satisfy within-group monotonicity. We validate our algorithm using US Census survey data and show that within-group monotonicity can often be achieved at a small cost in terms of prediction granularity and shortlist size.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have made significant progress, but often suffer from fairness issues, as deep models typically show distinct accuracy differences among certain subgroups (e.g., males and females). Existing research addresses this critical issue by employing fairness-aware loss functions to constrain the last-layer outputs and directly regularize DNNs. Although the fairness of DNNs is improved, it is unclear how the trained network makes a fair prediction, which limits future fairness improvements. In this paper, we investigate fairness from the perspective of decision rationale and define the parameter parity score to characterize the fair decision process of networks by analyzing neuron influence in various subgroups. Extensive empirical studies show that the unfair issue could arise from the unaligned decision rationales of subgroups. Existing fairness regularization terms fail to achieve decision rationale alignment because they only constrain last-layer outputs while ignoring intermediate neuron alignment. To address the issue, we formulate the fairness as a new task, i.e., decision rationale alignment that requires DNNs' neurons to have consistent responses on subgroups at both intermediate processes and the final prediction. To make this idea practical during optimization, we relax the naive objective function and propose gradient-guided parity alignment, which encourages gradient-weighted consistency of neurons across subgroups. Extensive experiments on a variety of datasets show that our method can significantly enhance fairness while sustaining a high level of accuracy and outperforming other approaches by a wide margin.