Perceptions of the Fairness Impacts of Multiplicity in Machine Learning

September 18, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Anna P. Meyer, Yea-Seul Kim, Aws Albarghouthi, Loris D'Antoni arXiv ID 2409.12332 Category cs.CY: Computers & Society Cross-listed cs.HC Citations 7 Venue International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) is increasingly used in high-stakes settings, yet multiplicity - the existence of multiple good models - means that some predictions are essentially arbitrary. ML researchers and philosophers posit that multiplicity poses a fairness risk, but no studies have investigated whether stakeholders agree. In this work, we conduct a survey to see how multiplicity impacts lay stakeholders' - i.e., decision subjects' - perceptions of ML fairness, and which approaches to address multiplicity they prefer. We investigate how these perceptions are modulated by task characteristics (e.g., stakes and uncertainty). Survey respondents think that multiplicity threatens the fairness of model outcomes, but not the appropriateness of using the model, even though existing work suggests the opposite. Participants are strongly against resolving multiplicity by using a single model (effectively ignoring multiplicity) or by randomizing the outcomes. Our results indicate that model developers should be intentional about dealing with multiplicity in order to maintain fairness.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Computers & Society

R.I.P. πŸ‘» Ghosted

Green AI

Roy Schwartz, Jesse Dodge, ... (+2 more)

cs.CY πŸ› arXiv πŸ“š 1.5K cites 6 years ago

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted