Carlos Pinzón

Rūta Binkytė-Sadauskienė, Karima Makhlouf, Carlos Pinzón et al.

It is crucial to consider the social and ethical consequences of AI and ML based decisions for the safe and acceptable use of these emerging technologies. Fairness, in particular, guarantees that the ML decisions do not result in discrimination against individuals or minorities. Identifying and measuring reliably fairness/discrimination is better achieved using causality which considers the causal relation, beyond mere association, between the sensitive attribute (e.g. gender, race, religion, etc.) and the decision (e.g. job hiring, loan granting, etc.). The big impediment to the use of causality to address fairness, however, is the unavailability of the causal model (typically represented as a causal graph). Existing causal approaches to fairness in the literature do not address this problem and assume that the causal model is available. In this paper, we do not make such assumption and we review the major algorithms to discover causal relations from observable data. This study focuses on causal discovery and its impact on fairness. In particular, we show how different causal discovery approaches may result in different causal models and, most importantly, how even slight differences between causal models can have significant impact on fairness/discrimination conclusions. These results are consolidated by empirical analysis using synthetic and standard fairness benchmark datasets. The main goal of this study is to highlight the importance of the causal discovery step to appropriately address fairness using causality.

Rūta Binkytė, Carlos Pinzón, Szilvia Lestyán et al.

Differential privacy is a widely adopted framework designed to safeguard the sensitive information of data providers within a data set. It is based on the application of controlled noise at the interface between the server that stores and processes the data, and the data consumers. Local differential privacy is a variant that allows data providers to apply the privatization mechanism themselves on their data individually. Therefore it provides protection also in contexts in which the server, or even the data collector, cannot be trusted. The introduction of noise, however, inevitably affects the utility of the data, particularly by distorting the correlations between individual data components. This distortion can prove detrimental to tasks such as causal discovery. In this paper, we consider various well-known locally differentially private mechanisms and compare the trade-off between the privacy they provide, and the accuracy of the causal structure produced by algorithms for causal learning when applied to data obfuscated by these mechanisms. Our analysis yields valuable insights for selecting appropriate local differentially private protocols for causal discovery tasks. We foresee that our findings will aid researchers and practitioners in conducting locally private causal discovery.

Sara Saeidian, Carlos Pinzón, Catuscia Palamidessi

We study privacy guarantees in the framework of pointwise maximal leakage (PML) that satisfy two requirements: they are robust under post-processing and upper bound the failure probability, i.e., the probability that the information leakage exceeds a given threshold. We first examine two candidate definitions inspired by (approximate) differential privacy and show that neither one satisfies both requirements simultaneously. We then introduce the notion of the PML envelope, which quantifies the largest amount of information leakage about a secret after arbitrary post-processing of a mechanism's output. By construction, the PML envelope satisfies both requirements. We discuss basic structural properties of the envelope, such as monotonicity, and derive general upper and lower bounds. We further analyze the envelope for two widely used privacy mechanisms: the PML-extremal mechanisms in the high-privacy regime and randomized response. Overall, this work establishes the PML envelope as a natural and operationally meaningful definition for providing privacy guarantees that are preserved under arbitrary downstream transformations.

Carlos Pinzón, Catuscia Palamidessi, Pablo Piantanida et al.

One of the main concerns about fairness in machine learning (ML) is that, in order to achieve it, one may have to trade off some accuracy. To overcome this issue, Hardt et al. proposed the notion of equality of opportunity (EO), which is compatible with maximal accuracy when the target label is deterministic with respect to the input features. In the probabilistic case, however, the issue is more complicated: It has been shown that under differential privacy constraints, there are data sources for which EO can only be achieved at the total detriment of accuracy, in the sense that a classifier that satisfies EO cannot be more accurate than a trivial (i.e., constant) classifier. In our paper we strengthen this result by removing the privacy constraint. Namely, we show that for certain data sources, the most accurate classifier that satisfies EO is a trivial classifier. Furthermore, we study the trade-off between accuracy and EO loss (opportunity difference), and provide a sufficient condition on the data source under which EO and non-trivial accuracy are compatible.