Detection and Evaluation of Machine Learning Bias
Source abstract
Abstract
Machine learning models are built using training data, which is collected from human experience and is prone to bias. Humans demonstrate a cognitive bias in their thinking and behavior, which is ultimately reflected in the collected data. From Amazon’s hiring system, which was built using ten years of human hiring experience, to a judicial system that was trained using human judging practices, these systems all include some element of bias. The best machine learning models are said to mimic humans’ cognitive ability, and thus such models are also inclined towards bias. However, detecting and evaluating bias is a very important step for better explainable models. In this work, we aim to explain bias in learning models in relation to humans’ cognitive bias and propose a wrapper technique to detect and evaluate bias in machine learning models using an openly accessible dataset from UCI Machine Learning Repository. In the deployed dataset, the potentially biased attributes (PBAs) are gender and race. This study introduces the concept of alternation functions to swap the values of PBAs, and evaluates the impact on prediction using KL divergence. Results demonstrate females and Asians to be associated with low wages, placing some open research questions for the research community to ponder over.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Center for Artificial Intelligence (CAI), King Khalid University, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia
College of Computer Science, King Khalid University, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia
Funding
King Khalid University
References (37)
Show source-provided references
1. Angwin, J., Larson, J., Larson, S.M., and Kirchner, L. (2021, March 22). Machine Bias. ProPublica. Available online: https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing.10.1201/9781003278290-37 ↗
2. Castro, C. (2019). What’s Wrong with Machine Bias. Ergo Open Access J. Philos., 6.10.3998/ergo.12405314.0006.015 ↗
3. Corbett-Davies, S., and Goel, S. (2018). The measure and mismeasure of fairness: A critical review of fair machine learning. arXiv.
4. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations10.1126/science.aax2342 ↗
5. Potential biases in machine learning algorithms using electronic health record data10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3763 ↗
6. Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: How noisy information processing can bias human decision making10.1037/a0025940 ↗
7. Haselton, M.G., Nettle, D., and Murray, D.R. (2015). The evolution of cognitive bias. The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781119125563.evpsych241 ↗
8. Sun, T., Gaut, A., Tang, S., Huang, Y., ElSherief, M., Zhao, J., Mirza, D., Belding, E., Chang, K.W., and Wang, W.Y. (2019). Mitigating gender bias in natural language processing: Literature review. arXiv.10.18653/v1/P19-1159 ↗
9. Amini, A., Soleimany, A.P., Schwarting, W., Bhatia, S.N., and Rus, D. (2019, January 27–28). Uncovering and mitigating algorithmic bias through learned latent structure. Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, Honolulu, HI, USA.10.1145/3306618.3314243 ↗
10. Uncovering gender bias in newspaper coverage of Irish politicians using machine learning10.1093/llc/fqy005 ↗
11. Prates, M.O., Avelar, P.H., and Lamb, L.C. (2019). Assessing gender bias in machine translation: A case study with google translate. Neural Comput. Appl., 1–19.10.1007/s00521-019-04144-6 ↗
12. Computing Machinery and Intelligence
13. Cowgill, B., Dell’Acqua, F., Deng, S., Hsu, D., Verma, N., and Chaintreau, A. (2020, January 13–17). Biased Programmers? Or Biased Data? A Field Experiment in Operationalizing AI Ethics. Proceedings of the 21st ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, Virtual Event.10.1145/3391403.3399545 ↗
14. Harris, C.G. (2020, January 20–24). Methods to Evaluate Temporal Cognitive Biases in Machine Learning Prediction Models. Proceedings of the WWW ’20: Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020, Taipei, Taiwan.
15. A high-bias, low-variance introduction to machine learning for physicists10.1016/j.physrep.2019.03.001 ↗
16. Hardt, M., Price, E., and Srebro, N. (2016, January 5–10). Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Barcelona, Spain.
17. Jiang, H., and Nachum, O. (2020, January 26–28). Identifying and correcting label bias in machine learning. Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (PMLR), Virtual Event.
18. Sun, W., Nasraoui, O., and Shafto, P. (2020). Evolution and impact of bias in human and machine learning algorithm interaction. PLoS ONE, 15.10.1371/journal.pone.0235502 ↗
19. Agarwal, A., Beygelzimer, A., Dudík, M., Langford, J., and Wallach, H. (2018, January 10–15). A reductions approach to fair classification. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (PMLR), Stockholm, Sweden.
20. Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N., Lerman, K., and Galstyan, A. (2019). A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. arXiv.
21. Rudin, C., Wang, C., and Coker, B. (2018). The age of secrecy and unfairness in recidivism prediction. arXiv.
22. Belkin, M., Hsu, D., Ma, S., and Mandal, S. (2018). Reconciling modern machine learning and the bias-variance trade-off. arXiv.10.1073/pnas.1903070116 ↗
23. Dixon, L., Li, J., Sorensen, J., Thain, N., and Vasserman, L. (2018, January 2–3). Measuring and mitigating unintended bias in text classification. Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1145/3278721.3278729 ↗
24. De-Arteaga, M., Romanov, A., Wallach, H., Chayes, J., Borgs, C., Chouldechova, A., Geyik, S., Kenthapadi, K., and Kalai, A.T. (2019, January 29–31). Bias in bios: A case study of semantic representation bias in a high-stakes setting. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/3287560.3287572 ↗
25. Leavy, S. (2018, January 28). Gender bias in artificial intelligence: The need for diversity and gender theory in machine learning. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Gender Equality in Software Engineering, Gothenburg, Sweden.10.1145/3195570.3195580 ↗
26. Bellamy, R.K., Dey, K., Hind, M., Hoffman, S.C., Houde, S., Kannan, K., Lohia, P., Martino, J., Mehta, S., and Mojsilovic, A. (2018). AI Fairness 360: An extensible toolkit for detecting, understanding, and mitigating unwanted algorithmic bias. arXiv.
27. Ensuring fairness in machine learning to advance health equity10.7326/M18-1990 ↗
28. Zhang, B.H., Lemoine, B., and Mitchell, M. (2018, January 2–3). Mitigating unwanted biases with adversarial learning. Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1145/3278721.3278779 ↗
29. Empirical assessment of bias in machine learning diagnostic test accuracy studies10.1093/jamia/ocaa075 ↗
30. Lötsch, J., and Ultsch, A. (2020). Current projection methods-induced biases at subgroup detection for machine-learning based data-analysis of biomedical data. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 21.10.3390/ijms21010079 ↗
31. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 ↗
32. Patient safety and quality improvement: Ethical principles for a regulatory approach to bias in healthcare machine learning10.1093/jamia/ocaa085 ↗
33. Yapo, A., and Weiss, J. (2018, January 3–6). Ethical implications of bias in machine learning. Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hilton Waikoloa Village, HI, USA.10.24251/HICSS.2018.668 ↗
34. Barbosa, N.M., and Chen, M. (2019, January 4–9). Rehumanized crowdsourcing: A labeling framework addressing bias and ethics in machine learning. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, UK.10.1145/3290605.3300773 ↗
35. Barbu, A., Mayo, D., Alverio, J., Luo, W., Wang, C., Gutfreund, D., Tenenbaum, J., and Katz, B. (2019, January 8–14). Objectnet: A large-scale bias-controlled dataset for pushing the limits of object recognition models. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
36. Artificial intelligence, bias and clinical safety10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008370 ↗
37. On information and sufficiency10.1214/aoms/1177729694 ↗