Debolina Halder Lina

Camille Olivia Little, Debolina Halder Lina, Genevera I. Allen

Across various sectors such as healthcare, criminal justice, national security, finance, and technology, large-scale machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) systems are being deployed to make critical data-driven decisions. Many have asked if we can and should trust these ML systems to be making these decisions. Two critical components are prerequisites for trust in ML systems: interpretability, or the ability to understand why the ML system makes the decisions it does, and fairness, which ensures that ML systems do not exhibit bias against certain individuals or groups. Both interpretability and fairness are important and have separately received abundant attention in the ML literature, but so far, there have been very few methods developed to directly interpret models with regard to their fairness. In this paper, we focus on arguably the most popular type of ML interpretation: feature importance scores. Inspired by the use of decision trees in knowledge distillation, we propose to leverage trees as interpretable surrogates for complex black-box ML models. Specifically, we develop a novel fair feature importance score for trees that can be used to interpret how each feature contributes to fairness or bias in trees, tree-based ensembles, or tree-based surrogates of any complex ML system. Like the popular mean decrease in impurity for trees, our Fair Feature Importance Score is defined based on the mean decrease (or increase) in group bias. Through simulations as well as real examples on benchmark fairness datasets, we demonstrate that our Fair Feature Importance Score offers valid interpretations for both tree-based ensembles and tree-based surrogates of other ML systems.

Debolina Halder Lina, Arlei Silva

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) achieve high performance but can be opaque to humans, making it difficult to understand and compare the many proposed architectures. While existing explainability methods attribute individual predictions to nodes, edges, or features, they do not provide architectural transparency or explain the fundamental performance gap between simple and more complex models. To address this limitation, we introduce Model-to-Data (M2D) distillation, a new framework that increases transparency by transferring model complexity into the data space. M2D distills the teacher model into an augmented graph with enriched features and structure, enabling a simple student to match the teacher's performance. By materializing model behavior in the data, our approach allows humans to inspect architectural advantages directly. We show that M2D reveals underlying mechanisms such as fairness objectives and attention-based aggregation in an interpretable way, enhancing GNN transparency while preserving performance.

João Mattos, Debolina Halder Lina, Arlei Silva

Link prediction is a fundamental task in graph machine learning with applications, ranging from social recommendation to knowledge graph completion. Fairness in this setting is critical, as biased predictions can exacerbate societal inequalities. Prior work adopts a dyadic definition of fairness, enforcing fairness through demographic parity between intra-group and inter-group link predictions. However, we show that this dyadic framing can obscure underlying disparities across subgroups, allowing systemic biases to go undetected. Moreover, we argue that demographic parity does not meet desired properties for fairness assessment in ranking-based tasks such as link prediction. We formalize the limitations of existing fairness evaluations and propose a framework that enables a more expressive assessment. Additionally, we propose a lightweight post-processing method combined with decoupled link predictors that effectively mitigates bias and achieves state-of-the-art fairness-utility trade-offs.

Debolina Halder Lina, Arlei Silva

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have achieved state-of-the-art results in many relevant tasks where decisions might disproportionately impact specific communities. However, existing work on fair GNNs often assumes that either sensitive attributes are fully observed or they are missing completely at random. We show that an adversarial missingness process can inadvertently disguise a fair model through the imputation, leading the model to overestimate the fairness of its predictions. We address this challenge by proposing Better Fair than Sorry (BFtS), a fair missing data imputation model for sensitive attributes. The key principle behind BFtS is that imputations should approximate the worst-case scenario for fairness -- i.e. when optimizing fairness is the hardest. We implement this idea using a 3-player adversarial scheme where two adversaries collaborate against a GNN classifier, and the classifier minimizes the maximum bias. Experiments using synthetic and real datasets show that BFtS often achieves a better fairness x accuracy trade-off than existing alternatives under an adversarial missingness process.