Ying Xiao

Xinyue Li, Sixuan Li, Ying Xiao et al.

Fairness is a critical requirement for human-related, high-stakes software systems, motivating extensive research on bias mitigation. Prior work has largely focused on tabular data settings using traditional Machine Learning (ML) methods. With the rapid rise of Large Language Models (LLMs), recent studies have begun to explore their use for bias mitigation in the same setting. However, it remains unclear whether LLM-based methods offer advantages over traditional ML methods, leaving software engineers without clear guidance for practical adoption. To address this gap, we present a large-scale study comparing state-of-the-art ML- and LLM-based bias mitigation methods. We find that ML-based methods consistently outperform LLM-based methods in both fairness and predictive performance, with even strong LLMs failing to surpass established ML baselines. To understand why prior LLM-based studies report favorable results, we analyze their evaluation settings and show that these gains are largely driven by artificially balanced test data rather than realistic imbalanced distributions. We further observe that existing LLM-based methods primarily rely on in-context learning and thus fail to leverage all available training data. Motivated by this, we explore supervised fine-tuning on the full training set and find that, while it achieves competitive results, its advantages over traditional ML methods remain limited. These findings suggest that LLMs are not a silver bullet for software fairness.

Ying Xiao, Shangwen Wang, Sicen Liu et al.

Software built on top of machine learning algorithms is becoming increasingly prevalent in a variety of fields, including college admissions, healthcare, insurance, and justice. The effectiveness and efficiency of these systems heavily depend on the quality of the training datasets. Biased datasets can lead to unfair and potentially harmful outcomes, particularly in such critical decision-making systems where the allocation of resources may be affected. This can exacerbate discrimination against certain groups and cause significant social disruption. To mitigate such unfairness, a series of bias-mitigating methods are proposed. Generally, these studies improve the fairness of the trained models to a certain degree but with the expense of sacrificing the model performance. In this paper, we propose FITNESS, a bias mitigation approach via de-correlating the causal effects between sensitive features (e.g., the sex) and the label. Our key idea is that by de-correlating such effects from a causality perspective, the model would avoid making predictions based on sensitive features and thus fairness could be improved. Furthermore, FITNESS leverages multi-objective optimization to achieve a better performance-fairness trade-off. To evaluate the effectiveness, we compare FITNESS with 7 state-of-the-art methods in 8 benchmark tasks by multiple metrics. Results show that FITNESS can outperform the state-of-the-art methods on bias mitigation while preserve the model's performance: it improved the model's fairness under all the scenarios while decreased the model's performance under only 26.67% of the scenarios. Additionally, FITNESS surpasses the Fairea Baseline in 96.72% cases, outperforming all methods we compared.

Santosh S. Vempala, Ying Xiao

We present a simple, general technique for reducing the sample complexity of matrix and tensor decomposition algorithms applied to distributions. We use the technique to give a polynomial-time algorithm for standard ICA with sample complexity nearly linear in the dimension, thereby improving substantially on previous bounds. The analysis is based on properties of random polynomials, namely the spacings of an ensemble of polynomials. Our technique also applies to other applications of tensor decompositions, including spherical Gaussian mixture models.