Jamie Morgenstern

Martin Bertran, Shuai Tang, Michael Kearns et al. · amazon-science

Membership inference attacks are designed to determine, using black box access to trained models, whether a particular example was used in training or not. Membership inference can be formalized as a hypothesis testing problem. The most effective existing attacks estimate the distribution of some test statistic (usually the model's confidence on the true label) on points that were (and were not) used in training by training many \emph{shadow models} -- i.e. models of the same architecture as the model being attacked, trained on a random subsample of data. While effective, these attacks are extremely computationally expensive, especially when the model under attack is large. We introduce a new class of attacks based on performing quantile regression on the distribution of confidence scores induced by the model under attack on points that are not used in training. We show that our method is competitive with state-of-the-art shadow model attacks, while requiring substantially less compute because our attack requires training only a single model. Moreover, unlike shadow model attacks, our proposed attack does not require any knowledge of the architecture of the model under attack and is therefore truly ``black-box". We show the efficacy of this approach in an extensive series of experiments on various datasets and model architectures.

Ira Globus-Harris, Varun Gupta, Christopher Jung et al.

We show how to take a regression function $\hat{f}$ that is appropriately ``multicalibrated'' and efficiently post-process it into an approximately error minimizing classifier satisfying a large variety of fairness constraints. The post-processing requires no labeled data, and only a modest amount of unlabeled data and computation. The computational and sample complexity requirements of computing $\hat f$ are comparable to the requirements for solving a single fair learning task optimally, but it can in fact be used to solve many different downstream fairness-constrained learning problems efficiently. Our post-processing method easily handles intersecting groups, generalizing prior work on post-processing regression functions to satisfy fairness constraints that only applied to disjoint groups. Our work extends recent work showing that multicalibrated regression functions are ``omnipredictors'' (i.e. can be post-processed to optimally solve unconstrained ERM problems) to constrained optimization.

Sarah Dean, Jamie Morgenstern

Many projects (both practical and academic) have designed algorithms to match users to content they will enjoy under the assumption that user's preferences and opinions do not change with the content they see. Evidence suggests that individuals' preferences are directly shaped by what content they see -- radicalization, rabbit holes, polarization, and boredom are all example phenomena of preferences affected by content. Polarization in particular can occur even in ecosystems with "mass media," where no personalization takes place, as recently explored in a natural model of preference dynamics by~\citet{hkazla2019geometric} and~\citet{gaitonde2021polarization}. If all users' preferences are drawn towards content they already like, or are repelled from content they already dislike, uniform consumption of media leads to a population of heterogeneous preferences converging towards only two poles. In this work, we explore whether some phenomenon akin to polarization occurs when users receive \emph{personalized} content recommendations. We use a similar model of preference dynamics, where an individual's preferences move towards content the consume and enjoy, and away from content they consume and dislike. We show that standard user reward maximization is an almost trivial goal in such an environment (a large class of simple algorithms will achieve only constant regret). A more interesting objective, then, is to understand under what conditions a recommendation algorithm can ensure stationarity of user's preferences. We show how to design a content recommendations which can achieve approximate stationarity, under mild conditions on the set of available content, when a user's preferences are known, and how one can learn enough about a user's preferences to implement such a strategy even when user preferences are initially unknown.

Saba Ahmadi, Pranjal Awasthi, Samir Khuller et al.

In this paper, we propose a natural notion of individual preference (IP) stability for clustering, which asks that every data point, on average, is closer to the points in its own cluster than to the points in any other cluster. Our notion can be motivated from several perspectives, including game theory and algorithmic fairness. We study several questions related to our proposed notion. We first show that deciding whether a given data set allows for an IP-stable clustering in general is NP-hard. As a result, we explore the design of efficient algorithms for finding IP-stable clusterings in some restricted metric spaces. We present a polytime algorithm to find a clustering satisfying exact IP-stability on the real line, and an efficient algorithm to find an IP-stable 2-clustering for a tree metric. We also consider relaxing the stability constraint, i.e., every data point should not be too far from its own cluster compared to any other cluster. For this case, we provide polytime algorithms with different guarantees. We evaluate some of our algorithms and several standard clustering approaches on real data sets.

Romain Camilleri, Andrew Wagenmaker, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

Active learning methods have shown great promise in reducing the number of samples necessary for learning. As automated learning systems are adopted into real-time, real-world decision-making pipelines, it is increasingly important that such algorithms are designed with safety in mind. In this work we investigate the complexity of learning the best safe decision in interactive environments. We reduce this problem to a constrained linear bandits problem, where our goal is to find the best arm satisfying certain (unknown) safety constraints. We propose an adaptive experimental design-based algorithm, which we show efficiently trades off between the difficulty of showing an arm is unsafe vs suboptimal. To our knowledge, our results are the first on best-arm identification in linear bandits with safety constraints. In practice, we demonstrate that this approach performs well on synthetic and real world datasets.

Sarah Dean, Mihaela Curmei, Lillian J. Ratliff et al.

Numerous online services are data-driven: the behavior of users affects the system's parameters, and the system's parameters affect the users' experience of the service, which in turn affects the way users may interact with the system. For example, people may choose to use a service only for tasks that already works well, or they may choose to switch to a different service. These adaptations influence the ability of a system to learn about a population of users and tasks in order to improve its performance broadly. In this work, we analyze a class of such dynamics -- where users allocate their participation amongst services to reduce the individual risk they experience, and services update their model parameters to reduce the service's risk on their current user population. We refer to these dynamics as \emph{risk-reducing}, which cover a broad class of common model updates including gradient descent and multiplicative weights. For this general class of dynamics, we show that asymptotically stable equilibria are always segmented, with sub-populations allocated to a single learner. Under mild assumptions, the utilitarian social optimum is a stable equilibrium. In contrast to previous work, which shows that repeated risk minimization can result in (Hashimoto et al., 2018; Miller et al., 2021), we find that repeated myopic updates with multiple learners lead to better outcomes. We illustrate the phenomena via a simulated example initialized from real data.

Rachel Hong, Jevan Hutson, William Agnew et al.

We investigate the contents of web-scraped data for training AI systems, at sizes where human dataset curators and compilers no longer manually annotate every sample. Building off of prior privacy concerns in machine learning models, we ask: What are the legal privacy implications of web-scraped machine learning datasets? In an empirical study of a popular training dataset, we find significant presence of personally identifiable information despite sanitization efforts. Our audit provides concrete evidence to support the concern that any large-scale web-scraped dataset may contain legally defined personal data. We use these findings of a real-world dataset to inform our legal analysis with respect to existing privacy and data protection laws. We surface various legal risks of current data curation practices that may propagate personal information to train downstream models. Based on our empirical and legal analyses, we argue for reorientation of current frameworks of "publicly available" information to meaningfully limit the development of AI built upon indiscriminate scraping of the internet.

Zhiming Huang, Jamie Morgenstern, Aaron Roth et al.

We study online multicalibration beyond the worst-case. We give a single, efficient algorithm which dynamically interpolates between benign and worst-case sequences by adaptively refining a dyadic grid of prediction values. Its error is controlled by the number of leaves in the refinement tree. Our analysis recovers the known $\widetilde O(T^{2/3})$ worst-case-optimal rate for online multicalibration, while simultaneously automatically adapting to easier instances: in the marginal stochastic setting it obtains a rate of $\widetilde O(\sqrt T)$, and for piecewise-stationary means with $J$ segments its rate is $\widetilde O(\sqrt{JT})$. More generally, the rate depends on a threshold-complexity measure of the predictable mean process relative to the group family. We show that this dependence is tight up to logarithmic factors.

Rachel Hong, William Agnew, Tadayoshi Kohno et al.

As training datasets become increasingly drawn from unstructured, uncontrolled environments such as the web, researchers and industry practitioners have increasingly relied upon data filtering techniques to "filter out the noise" of web-scraped data. While datasets have been widely shown to reflect the biases and values of their creators, in this paper we contribute to an emerging body of research that assesses the filters used to create these datasets. We show that image-text data filtering also has biases and is value-laden, encoding specific notions of what is counted as "high-quality" data. In our work, we audit a standard approach of image-text CLIP-filtering on the academic benchmark DataComp's CommonPool by analyzing discrepancies of filtering through various annotation techniques across multiple modalities of image, text, and website source. We find that data relating to several imputed demographic groups -- such as LGBTQ+ people, older women, and younger men -- are associated with higher rates of exclusion. Moreover, we demonstrate cases of exclusion amplification: not only are certain marginalized groups already underrepresented in the unfiltered data, but CLIP-filtering excludes data from these groups at higher rates. The data-filtering step in the machine learning pipeline can therefore exacerbate representation disparities already present in the data-gathering step, especially when existing filters are designed to optimize a specifically-chosen downstream performance metric like zero-shot image classification accuracy. Finally, we show that the NSFW filter fails to remove sexually-explicit content from CommonPool, and that CLIP-filtering includes several categories of copyrighted content at high rates. Our conclusions point to a need for fundamental changes in dataset creation and filtering practices.

Chung Peng Lee, Rachel Hong, Harry Jiang et al.

The internet has become the main source of data to train modern text-to-image or vision-language models, yet it is increasingly unclear whether web-scale data collection practices for training AI systems adequately respect data owners' wishes. Ignoring the owner's indication of consent around data usage not only raises ethical concerns but also has recently been elevated into lawsuits around copyright infringement cases. In this work, we aim to reveal information about data owners' consent to AI scraping and training, and study how it's expressed in DataComp, a popular dataset of 12.8 billion text-image pairs. We examine both the sample-level information, including the copyright notice, watermarking, and metadata, and the web-domain-level information, such as a site's Terms of Service (ToS) and Robots Exclusion Protocol. We estimate at least 122M of samples exhibit some indication of copyright notice in CommonPool, and find that 60\% of the samples in the top 50 domains come from websites with ToS that prohibit scraping. Furthermore, we estimate 9-13\% with 95\% confidence interval of samples from CommonPool to contain watermarks, where existing watermark detection methods fail to capture them in high fidelity. Our holistic methods and findings show that data owners rely on various channels to convey data consent, of which current AI data collection pipelines do not entirely respect. These findings highlight the limitations of the current dataset curation/release practice and the need for a unified data consent framework taking AI purposes into consideration.

Avinandan Bose, Mihaela Curmei, Daniel L. Jiang et al.

This paper investigates ML systems serving a group of users, with multiple models/services, each aimed at specializing to a sub-group of users. We consider settings where upon deploying a set of services, users choose the one minimizing their personal losses and the learner iteratively learns by interacting with diverse users. Prior research shows that the outcomes of learning dynamics, which comprise both the services' adjustments and users' service selections, hinge significantly on the initialization. However, finding good initializations faces two main challenges: (i) Bandit feedback: Typically, data on user preferences are not available before deploying services and observing user behavior; (ii) Suboptimal local solutions: The total loss landscape (i.e., the sum of loss functions across all users and services) is not convex and gradient-based algorithms can get stuck in poor local minima. We address these challenges with a randomized algorithm to adaptively select a minimal set of users for data collection in order to initialize a set of services. Under mild assumptions on the loss functions, we prove that our initialization leads to a total loss within a factor of the globally optimal total loss with complete user preference data}, and this factor scales logarithmically in the number of services. This result is a generalization of the well-known $k$-means++ guarantee to a broad problem class, which is also of independent interest. The theory is complemented by experiments on real as well as semi-synthetic datasets.

Romain Camilleri, Andrew Wagenmaker, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

In critical machine learning applications, ensuring fairness is essential to avoid perpetuating social inequities. In this work, we address the challenges of reducing bias and improving accuracy in data-scarce environments, where the cost of collecting labeled data prohibits the use of large, labeled datasets. In such settings, active learning promises to maximize marginal accuracy gains of small amounts of labeled data. However, existing applications of active learning for fairness fail to deliver on this, typically requiring large labeled datasets, or failing to ensure the desired fairness tolerance is met on the population distribution. To address such limitations, we introduce an innovative active learning framework that combines an exploration procedure inspired by posterior sampling with a fair classification subroutine. We demonstrate that this framework performs effectively in very data-scarce regimes, maximizing accuracy while satisfying fairness constraints with high probability. We evaluate our proposed approach using well-established real-world benchmark datasets and compare it against state-of-the-art methods, demonstrating its effectiveness in producing fair models, and improvement over existing methods.

Yuanyuan Yang, Ruimin Zhang, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

As machine learning models continue to grow in size and complexity, efficient serving faces increasingly broad trade-offs spanning accuracy, latency, resource usage, and other objectives. Multi-model serving further complicates these trade-offs; for example, in cascaded models, each early-exit decision balances latency reduction against potential accuracy loss. Despite the pervasiveness and importance of such trade-offs, current strategies remain largely heuristic and case-specific, limiting both their theoretical guarantees and general applicability. We present a general framework, T-Tamer, which formalizes this setting as a multi-stage decision process, where the objective is to determine both when to exit and which model to consult. Our main result shows that recall (i.e., the ability to revisit earlier models) is both necessary and sufficient for achieving provable performance guarantees. In particular, we prove that strategies without recall cannot obtain any constant-factor approximation to the optimal trade-off, whereas recall-based strategies provably attain the optimal trade-off in polynomial time. We validate our analysis through experiments on synthetic datasets and early-exit workloads for vision and NLP benchmarks. The results show that recall-based strategies consistently yield efficient accuracy-latency trade-offs. We hope this work provides a principled foundation for bridging heuristic practice with theoretical guarantees in the design of early-exit and cascaded models.

Claire Jie Zhang, Seyed A. Esmaeili, Jamie Morgenstern

Fair clustering has traditionally focused on ensuring equitable group representation or equalizing group-specific clustering costs. However, Dickerson et al. (2025) recently showed that these fairness notions may yield undesirable or unintuitive clustering outcomes and advocated for a welfare-centric clustering approach that models the utilities of the groups. In this work, we model group utilities based on both distances and proportional representation and formalize two optimization objectives based on welfare-centric clustering: the Rawlsian (Egalitarian) objective and the Utilitarian objective. We introduce novel algorithms for both objectives and prove theoretical guarantees for them. Empirical evaluations on multiple real-world datasets demonstrate that our methods significantly outperform existing fair clustering baselines.

John Dickerson, Seyed A. Esmaeili, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

Clustering is a fundamental problem in machine learning and operations research. Therefore, given the fact that fairness considerations have become of paramount importance in algorithm design, fairness in clustering has received significant attention from the research community. The literature on fair clustering has resulted in a collection of interesting fairness notions and elaborate algorithms. In this paper, we take a critical view of fair clustering, identifying a collection of ignored issues such as the lack of a clear utility characterization and the difficulty in accounting for the downstream effects of a fair clustering algorithm in machine learning settings. In some cases, we demonstrate examples where the application of a fair clustering algorithm can have significant negative impacts on social welfare. We end by identifying a collection of steps that would lead towards more impactful research in fair clustering.

John Dickerson, Seyed A. Esmaeili, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

The remarkable attention which fair clustering has received in the last few years has resulted in a significant number of different notions of fairness. Despite the fact that these notions are well-justified, they are often motivated and studied in a disjoint manner where one fairness desideratum is considered exclusively in isolation from the others. This leaves the understanding of the relations between different fairness notions as an important open problem in fair clustering. In this paper, we take the first step in this direction. Specifically, we consider the two most prominent demographic representation fairness notions in clustering: (1) Group Fairness (GF), where the different demographic groups are supposed to have close to population-level representation in each cluster and (2) Diversity in Center Selection (DS), where the selected centers are supposed to have close to population-level representation of each group. We show that given a constant approximation algorithm for one constraint (GF or DS only) we can obtain a constant approximation solution that satisfies both constraints simultaneously. Interestingly, we prove that any given solution that satisfies the GF constraint can always be post-processed at a bounded degradation to the clustering cost to additionally satisfy the DS constraint while the reverse is not true. Furthermore, we show that both GF and DS are incompatible (having an empty feasibility set in the worst case) with a collection of other distance-based fairness notions. Finally, we carry experiments to validate our theoretical findings.

Pranjal Awasthi, Christopher Jung, Jamie Morgenstern

Suppose we are given two datasets: a labeled dataset and unlabeled dataset which also has additional auxiliary features not present in the first dataset. What is the most principled way to use these datasets together to construct a predictor? The answer should depend upon whether these datasets are generated by the same or different distributions over their mutual feature sets, and how similar the test distribution will be to either of those distributions. In many applications, the two datasets will likely follow different distributions, but both may be close to the test distribution. We introduce the problem of building a predictor which minimizes the maximum loss over all probability distributions over the original features, auxiliary features, and binary labels, whose Wasserstein distance is $r_1$ away from the empirical distribution over the labeled dataset and $r_2$ away from that of the unlabeled dataset. This can be thought of as a generalization of distributionally robust optimization (DRO), which allows for two data sources, one of which is unlabeled and may contain auxiliary features.

Bhuvesh Kumar, Jamie Morgenstern, Okke Schrijvers

Online ad platforms offer budget management tools for advertisers that aim to maximize the number of conversions given a budget constraint. As the volume of impressions, conversion rates and prices vary over time, these budget management systems learn a spend plan (to find the optimal distribution of budget over time) and run a pacing algorithm which follows the spend plan. This paper considers two models for impressions and competition that varies with time: a) an episodic model which exhibits stationarity in each episode, but each episode can be arbitrarily different from the next, and b) a model where the distributions of prices and values change slowly over time. We present the first learning theoretic guarantees on both the accuracy of spend plans and the resulting end-to-end budget management system. We present four main results: 1) for the episodic setting we give sample complexity bounds for the spend rate prediction problem: given $n$ samples from each episode, with high probability we have $|\widehatρ_e - ρ_e| \leq \tilde{O}(\frac{1}{n^{1/3}})$ where $ρ_e$ is the optimal spend rate for the episode, $\widehatρ_e$ is the estimate from our algorithm, 2) we extend the algorithm of Balseiro and Gur (2017) to operate on varying, approximate spend rates and show that the resulting combined system of optimal spend rate estimation and online pacing algorithm for episodic settings has regret that vanishes in number of historic samples $n$ and the number of rounds $T$, 3) for non-episodic but slowly-changing distributions we show that the same approach approximates the optimal bidding strategy up to a factor dependent on the rate-of-change of the distributions and 4) we provide experiments showing that our algorithm outperforms both static spend plans and non-pacing across a wide variety of settings.

Siddarth Srinivasan, Jamie Morgenstern

Peer reviewed publications are considered the gold standard in certifying and disseminating ideas that a research community considers valuable. However, we identify two major drawbacks of the current system: (1) the overwhelming demand for reviewers due to a large volume of submissions, and (2) the lack of incentives for reviewers to participate and expend the necessary effort to provide high-quality reviews. In this work, we adopt a mechanism-design approach to propose improvements to the peer review process, tying together the paper submission and review processes and simultaneously incentivizing high-quality submissions and reviews. In the submission stage, authors participate in a VCG auction for review slots by submitting their papers along with a bid that represents their expected value for having their paper reviewed. For the reviewing stage, we propose a novel peer prediction mechanism (H-DIPP) building on recent work in the information elicitation literature, which incentivizes participating reviewers to provide honest and effortful reviews. The revenue raised in the submission stage auction is used to pay reviewers based on the quality of their reviews in the reviewing stage.

Pranjal Awasthi, Alex Beutel, Matthaeus Kleindessner et al.

Training and evaluation of fair classifiers is a challenging problem. This is partly due to the fact that most fairness metrics of interest depend on both the sensitive attribute information and label information of the data points. In many scenarios it is not possible to collect large datasets with such information. An alternate approach that is commonly used is to separately train an attribute classifier on data with sensitive attribute information, and then use it later in the ML pipeline to evaluate the bias of a given classifier. While such decoupling helps alleviate the problem of demographic scarcity, it raises several natural questions such as: how should the attribute classifier be trained?, and how should one use a given attribute classifier for accurate bias estimation? In this work we study this question from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. We first experimentally demonstrate that the test accuracy of the attribute classifier is not always correlated with its effectiveness in bias estimation for a downstream model. In order to further investigate this phenomenon, we analyze an idealized theoretical model and characterize the structure of the optimal classifier. Our analysis has surprising and counter-intuitive implications where in certain regimes one might want to distribute the error of the attribute classifier as unevenly as possible among the different subgroups. Based on our analysis we develop heuristics for both training and using attribute classifiers for bias estimation in the data scarce regime. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach on real and simulated data.

Jacob Abernethy, Pranjal Awasthi, Matthäus Kleindessner et al.

We propose simple active sampling and reweighting strategies for optimizing min-max fairness that can be applied to any classification or regression model learned via loss minimization. The key intuition behind our approach is to use at each timestep a datapoint from the group that is worst off under the current model for updating the model. The ease of implementation and the generality of our robust formulation make it an attractive option for improving model performance on disadvantaged groups. For convex learning problems, such as linear or logistic regression, we provide a fine-grained analysis, proving the rate of convergence to a min-max fair solution.

Matthäus Kleindessner, Pranjal Awasthi, Jamie Morgenstern

A common distinction in fair machine learning, in particular in fair classification, is between group fairness and individual fairness. In the context of clustering, group fairness has been studied extensively in recent years; however, individual fairness for clustering has hardly been explored. In this paper, we propose a natural notion of individual fairness for clustering. Our notion asks that every data point, on average, is closer to the points in its own cluster than to the points in any other cluster. We study several questions related to our proposed notion of individual fairness. On the negative side, we show that deciding whether a given data set allows for such an individually fair clustering in general is NP-hard. On the positive side, for the special case of a data set lying on the real line, we propose an efficient dynamic programming approach to find an individually fair clustering. For general data sets, we investigate heuristics aimed at minimizing the number of individual fairness violations and compare them to standard clustering approaches on real data sets.

Margaret Mitchell, Dylan Baker, Nyalleng Moorosi et al.

The ethical concept of fairness has recently been applied in machine learning (ML) settings to describe a wide range of constraints and objectives. When considering the relevance of ethical concepts to subset selection problems, the concepts of diversity and inclusion are additionally applicable in order to create outputs that account for social power and access differentials. We introduce metrics based on these concepts, which can be applied together, separately, and in tandem with additional fairness constraints. Results from human subject experiments lend support to the proposed criteria. Social choice methods can additionally be leveraged to aggregate and choose preferable sets, and we detail how these may be applied.

Pranjal Awasthi, Matthäus Kleindessner, Jamie Morgenstern

Most approaches aiming to ensure a model's fairness with respect to a protected attribute (such as gender or race) assume to know the true value of the attribute for every data point. In this paper, we ask to what extent fairness interventions can be effective even when only imperfect information about the protected attribute is available. In particular, we study the prominent equalized odds postprocessing method of Hardt et al. (2016) under a perturbation of the attribute. We identify conditions on the perturbation that guarantee that the bias of a classifier is reduced even by running equalized odds with the perturbed attribute. We also study the error of the resulting classifier. We empirically observe that under our identified conditions most often the error does not suffer from a perturbation of the protected attribute. For a special case, we formally prove this observation to be true.

Ángel Alexander Cabrera, Will Epperson, Fred Hohman et al.

The growing capability and accessibility of machine learning has led to its application to many real-world domains and data about people. Despite the benefits algorithmic systems may bring, models can reflect, inject, or exacerbate implicit and explicit societal biases into their outputs, disadvantaging certain demographic subgroups. Discovering which biases a machine learning model has introduced is a great challenge, due to the numerous definitions of fairness and the large number of potentially impacted subgroups. We present FairVis, a mixed-initiative visual analytics system that integrates a novel subgroup discovery technique for users to audit the fairness of machine learning models. Through FairVis, users can apply domain knowledge to generate and investigate known subgroups, and explore suggested and similar subgroups. FairVis' coordinated views enable users to explore a high-level overview of subgroup performance and subsequently drill down into detailed investigation of specific subgroups. We show how FairVis helps to discover biases in two real datasets used in predicting income and recidivism. As a visual analytics system devoted to discovering bias in machine learning, FairVis demonstrates how interactive visualization may help data scientists and the general public understand and create more equitable algorithmic systems.

Uthaipon Tantipongpipat, Samira Samadi, Mohit Singh et al.

Dimensionality reduction is a classical technique widely used for data analysis. One foundational instantiation is Principal Component Analysis (PCA), which minimizes the average reconstruction error. In this paper, we introduce the "multi-criteria dimensionality reduction" problem where we are given multiple objectives that need to be optimized simultaneously. As an application, our model captures several fairness criteria for dimensionality reduction such as our novel Fair-PCA problem and the Nash Social Welfare (NSW) problem. In Fair-PCA, the input data is divided into $k$ groups, and the goal is to find a single $d$-dimensional representation for all groups for which the minimum variance of any one group is maximized. In NSW, the goal is to maximize the product of the individual variances of the groups achieved by the common low-dimensional space. Our main result is an exact polynomial-time algorithm for the two-criterion dimensionality reduction problem when the two criteria are increasing concave functions. As an application of this result, we obtain a polynomial time algorithm for Fair-PCA for $k=2$ groups and a polynomial time algorithm for NSW objective for $k=2$ groups. We also give approximation algorithms for $k>2$. Our technical contribution in the above results is to prove new low-rank properties of extreme point solutions to semi-definite programs. We conclude with experiments indicating the effectiveness of algorithms based on extreme point solutions of semi-definite programs on several real-world data sets.

Benjamin Wilson, Judy Hoffman, Jamie Morgenstern

In this work, we investigate whether state-of-the-art object detection systems have equitable predictive performance on pedestrians with different skin tones. This work is motivated by many recent examples of ML and vision systems displaying higher error rates for certain demographic groups than others. We annotate an existing large scale dataset which contains pedestrians, BDD100K, with Fitzpatrick skin tones in ranges [1-3] or [4-6]. We then provide an in-depth comparative analysis of performance between these two skin tone groupings, finding that neither time of day nor occlusion explain this behavior, suggesting this disparity is not merely the result of pedestrians in the 4-6 range appearing in more difficult scenes for detection. We investigate to what extent time of day, occlusion, and reweighting the supervised loss during training affect this predictive bias.

Matthäus Kleindessner, Samira Samadi, Pranjal Awasthi et al.

Given the widespread popularity of spectral clustering (SC) for partitioning graph data, we study a version of constrained SC in which we try to incorporate the fairness notion proposed by Chierichetti et al. (2017). According to this notion, a clustering is fair if every demographic group is approximately proportionally represented in each cluster. To this end, we develop variants of both normalized and unnormalized constrained SC and show that they help find fairer clusterings on both synthetic and real data. We also provide a rigorous theoretical analysis of our algorithms on a natural variant of the stochastic block model, where $h$ groups have strong inter-group connectivity, but also exhibit a "natural" clustering structure which is fair. We prove that our algorithms can recover this fair clustering with high probability.

Matthäus Kleindessner, Pranjal Awasthi, Jamie Morgenstern

In data summarization we want to choose $k$ prototypes in order to summarize a data set. We study a setting where the data set comprises several demographic groups and we are restricted to choose $k_i$ prototypes belonging to group $i$. A common approach to the problem without the fairness constraint is to optimize a centroid-based clustering objective such as $k$-center. A natural extension then is to incorporate the fairness constraint into the clustering problem. Existing algorithms for doing so run in time super-quadratic in the size of the data set, which is in contrast to the standard $k$-center problem being approximable in linear time. In this paper, we resolve this gap by providing a simple approximation algorithm for the $k$-center problem under the fairness constraint with running time linear in the size of the data set and $k$. If the number of demographic groups is small, the approximation guarantee of our algorithm only incurs a constant-factor overhead.

Samira Samadi, Uthaipon Tantipongpipat, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

We investigate whether the standard dimensionality reduction technique of PCA inadvertently produces data representations with different fidelity for two different populations. We show on several real-world data sets, PCA has higher reconstruction error on population A than on B (for example, women versus men or lower- versus higher-educated individuals). This can happen even when the data set has a similar number of samples from A and B. This motivates our study of dimensionality reduction techniques which maintain similar fidelity for A and B. We define the notion of Fair PCA and give a polynomial-time algorithm for finding a low dimensional representation of the data which is nearly-optimal with respect to this measure. Finally, we show on real-world data sets that our algorithm can be used to efficiently generate a fair low dimensional representation of the data.

Timnit Gebru, Jamie Morgenstern, Briana Vecchione et al.

The machine learning community currently has no standardized process for documenting datasets, which can lead to severe consequences in high-stakes domains. To address this gap, we propose datasheets for datasets. In the electronics industry, every component, no matter how simple or complex, is accompanied with a datasheet that describes its operating characteristics, test results, recommended uses, and other information. By analogy, we propose that every dataset be accompanied with a datasheet that documents its motivation, composition, collection process, recommended uses, and so on. Datasheets for datasets will facilitate better communication between dataset creators and dataset consumers, and encourage the machine learning community to prioritize transparency and accountability.

Sampath Kannan, Jamie Morgenstern, Aaron Roth et al.

Bandit learning is characterized by the tension between long-term exploration and short-term exploitation. However, as has recently been noted, in settings in which the choices of the learning algorithm correspond to important decisions about individual people (such as criminal recidivism prediction, lending, and sequential drug trials), exploration corresponds to explicitly sacrificing the well-being of one individual for the potential future benefit of others. This raises a fairness concern. In such settings, one might like to run a "greedy" algorithm, which always makes the (myopically) optimal decision for the individuals at hand - but doing this can result in a catastrophic failure to learn. In this paper, we consider the linear contextual bandit problem and revisit the performance of the greedy algorithm. We give a smoothed analysis, showing that even when contexts may be chosen by an adversary, small perturbations of the adversary's choices suffice for the algorithm to achieve "no regret", perhaps (depending on the specifics of the setting) with a constant amount of initial training data. This suggests that "generically" (i.e. in slightly perturbed environments), exploration and exploitation need not be in conflict in the linear setting.

Richard Berk, Hoda Heidari, Shahin Jabbari et al.

We introduce a flexible family of fairness regularizers for (linear and logistic) regression problems. These regularizers all enjoy convexity, permitting fast optimization, and they span the rang from notions of group fairness to strong individual fairness. By varying the weight on the fairness regularizer, we can compute the efficient frontier of the accuracy-fairness trade-off on any given dataset, and we measure the severity of this trade-off via a numerical quantity we call the Price of Fairness (PoF). The centerpiece of our results is an extensive comparative study of the PoF across six different datasets in which fairness is a primary consideration.

Shahin Jabbari, Matthew Joseph, Michael Kearns et al.

We initiate the study of fairness in reinforcement learning, where the actions of a learning algorithm may affect its environment and future rewards. Our fairness constraint requires that an algorithm never prefers one action over another if the long-term (discounted) reward of choosing the latter action is higher. Our first result is negative: despite the fact that fairness is consistent with the optimal policy, any learning algorithm satisfying fairness must take time exponential in the number of states to achieve non-trivial approximation to the optimal policy. We then provide a provably fair polynomial time algorithm under an approximate notion of fairness, thus establishing an exponential gap between exact and approximate fairness

Matthew Joseph, Michael Kearns, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

We study fairness in linear bandit problems. Starting from the notion of meritocratic fairness introduced in Joseph et al. [2016], we carry out a more refined analysis of a more general problem, achieving better performance guarantees with fewer modelling assumptions on the number and structure of available choices as well as the number selected. We also analyze the previously-unstudied question of fairness in infinite linear bandit problems, obtaining instance-dependent regret upper bounds as well as lower bounds demonstrating that this instance-dependence is necessary. The result is a framework for meritocratic fairness in an online linear setting that is substantially more powerful, general, and realistic than the current state of the art.

Matthew Joseph, Michael Kearns, Jamie Morgenstern et al.

We introduce the study of fairness in multi-armed bandit problems. Our fairness definition can be interpreted as demanding that given a pool of applicants (say, for college admission or mortgages), a worse applicant is never favored over a better one, despite a learning algorithm's uncertainty over the true payoffs. We prove results of two types. First, in the important special case of the classic stochastic bandits problem (i.e., in which there are no contexts), we provide a provably fair algorithm based on "chained" confidence intervals, and provide a cumulative regret bound with a cubic dependence on the number of arms. We further show that any fair algorithm must have such a dependence. When combined with regret bounds for standard non-fair algorithms such as UCB, this proves a strong separation between fair and unfair learning, which extends to the general contextual case. In the general contextual case, we prove a tight connection between fairness and the KWIK (Knows What It Knows) learning model: a KWIK algorithm for a class of functions can be transformed into a provably fair contextual bandit algorithm, and conversely any fair contextual bandit algorithm can be transformed into a KWIK learning algorithm. This tight connection allows us to provide a provably fair algorithm for the linear contextual bandit problem with a polynomial dependence on the dimension, and to show (for a different class of functions) a worst-case exponential gap in regret between fair and non-fair learning algorithms

Jamie Morgenstern, Tim Roughgarden

We present a general framework for proving polynomial sample complexity bounds for the problem of learning from samples the best auction in a class of "simple" auctions. Our framework captures all of the most prominent examples of "simple" auctions, including anonymous and non-anonymous item and bundle pricings, with either a single or multiple buyers. The technique we propose is to break the analysis of auctions into two natural pieces. First, one shows that the set of allocation rules have large amounts of structure; second, fixing an allocation on a sample, one shows that the set of auctions agreeing with this allocation on that sample have revenue functions with low dimensionality. Our results effectively imply that whenever it's possible to compute a near-optimal simple auction with a known prior, it is also possible to compute such an auction with an unknown prior (given a polynomial number of samples).

Justin Hsu, Jamie Morgenstern, Ryan Rogers et al.

Walrasian equilibrium prices can be said to coordinate markets: They support a welfare optimal allocation in which each buyer is buying bundle of goods that is individually most preferred. However, this clean story has two caveats. First, the prices alone are not sufficient to coordinate the market, and buyers may need to select among their most preferred bundles in a coordinated way to find a feasible allocation. Second, we don't in practice expect to encounter exact equilibrium prices tailored to the market, but instead only approximate prices, somehow encoding "distributional" information about the market. How well do prices work to coordinate markets when tie-breaking is not coordinated, and they encode only distributional information? We answer this question. First, we provide a genericity condition such that for buyers with Matroid Based Valuations, overdemand with respect to equilibrium prices is at most 1, independent of the supply of goods, even when tie-breaking is done in an uncoordinated fashion. Second, we provide learning-theoretic results that show that such prices are robust to changing the buyers in the market, so long as all buyers are sampled from the same (unknown) distribution.