How Do Fairness Definitions Fare? Examining Public Attitudes Towards Algorithmic Definitions of Fairness

November 08, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

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

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Nripsuta Saxena, Karen Huang, Evan DeFilippis, Goran Radanovic, David Parkes, Yang Liu arXiv ID 1811.03654 Category cs.AI: Artificial Intelligence Cross-listed cs.CY Citations 193 Venue AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
What is the best way to define algorithmic fairness? While many definitions of fairness have been proposed in the computer science literature, there is no clear agreement over a particular definition. In this work, we investigate ordinary people's perceptions of three of these fairness definitions. Across two online experiments, we test which definitions people perceive to be the fairest in the context of loan decisions, and whether fairness perceptions change with the addition of sensitive information (i.e., race of the loan applicants). Overall, one definition (calibrated fairness) tends to be more preferred than the others, and the results also provide support for the principle of affirmative action.
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€” Artificial Intelligence

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted