Kaveh Aryan

Amir Asiaee, Kaveh Aryan

Machine learning systems are often trained and evaluated for fairness on historical data, yet deployed in environments where conditions have shifted. A particularly common form of shift occurs when the prevalence of positive outcomes changes differently across demographic groups--for example, when disease rates rise faster in one population than another, or when economic conditions affect loan default rates unequally. We study group-conditional prior probability shift (GPPS), where the label prevalence $P(Y=1\mid A=a)$ may change between training and deployment while the feature-generation process $P(X\mid Y,A)$ remains stable. Our analysis yields three main contributions. First, we prove a fundamental dichotomy: fairness criteria based on error rates (equalized odds) are structurally invariant under GPPS, while acceptance-rate criteria (demographic parity) can drift--and we prove this drift is unavoidable for non-trivial classifiers (shift-robust impossibility). Second, we show that target-domain risk and fairness metrics are identifiable without target labels: the invariance of ROC quantities under GPPS enables consistent estimation from source labels and unlabeled target data alone, with finite-sample guarantees. Third, we propose TAP-GPPS, a label-free post-processing algorithm that estimates prevalences from unlabeled data, corrects posteriors, and selects thresholds to satisfy demographic parity in the target domain. Experiments validate our theoretical predictions and demonstrate that TAP-GPPS achieves target fairness with minimal utility loss.

Amir Asiaee, Kaveh Aryan

Boosting algorithms enjoy strong theoretical guarantees: when weak learners maintain positive edge, AdaBoost achieves geometric decrease of exponential loss. We study how to incorporate group fairness constraints into boosting while preserving analyzable training dynamics. Our approach, FairBoost, projects the ensemble-induced exponential-weights distribution onto a convex set of distributions satisfying fairness constraints (as a reweighting surrogate), then trains weak learners on this fair distribution. The key theoretical insight is that projecting the training distribution reduces the effective edge of weak learners by a quantity controlled by the KL-divergence of the projection. We prove an exponential-loss bound where the convergence rate depends on weak learner edge minus a "fairness cost" term $δ_t = \sqrt{\mathrm{KL}(w^t \| q^t)/2}$. This directly quantifies the accuracy-fairness tradeoff in boosting dynamics. Experiments on standard benchmarks validate the theoretical predictions and demonstrate competitive fairness-accuracy tradeoffs with stable training curves.

Amir Asiaee, Kaveh Aryan

Machine learning practitioners frequently observe tension between predictive accuracy and group fairness constraints -- yet sometimes fairness interventions appear to improve accuracy. We show that both phenomena can be artifacts of training data that misrepresents subgroup proportions. Under subpopulation shift (stable within-group distributions, shifted group proportions), we establish: (i) full importance-weighted correction is asymptotically unbiased but finite-sample suboptimal; (ii) the optimal finite-sample correction is a shrinkage reweighting that interpolates between target and training mixtures; (iii) apparent "fairness helps accuracy" can arise from comparing fairness methods to an improperly-weighted baseline. We provide an actionable evaluation protocol: fix representation (optimally) before fairness -- compare fairness interventions against a shrinkage-corrected baseline to isolate the true, irreducible price of fairness. Experiments on synthetic and real-world benchmarks (Adult, COMPAS) validate our theoretical predictions and demonstrate that this protocol eliminates spurious tradeoffs, revealing the genuine fairness-utility frontier.