Hana Samad, Michael Akinwumi, Jameel Khan et al.
As machine learning models are increasingly embedded into society through high-stakes decision-making, selecting the right algorithm for a given task, audience, and sector presents a critical challenge, particularly in the context of fairness. Traditional assessments of model fairness have often framed fairness as an objective mathematical property, treating model selection as an optimization problem under idealized informational conditions. This overlooks model multiplicity as a consideration--that multiple models can deliver similar performance while exhibiting different fairness characteristics. Legal scholars have engaged this challenge through the concept of Less Discriminatory Algorithms (LDAs), which frames model selection as a civil rights obligation. In real-world deployment, this normative challenge is bounded by constraints on fairness experimentation, e.g., regulatory standards, institutional priorities, and resource capacity. Against these considerations, the paper revisits Lee and Floridi (2021)'s relational fairness approach using updated 2021 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, and proposes an expansion of the scope of the LDA search process. We argue that extending the LDA search horizontally, considering fairness across model families themselves, provides a lightweight complement, or alternative, to within-model hyperparameter optimization, when operationalizing fairness in non-experimental, resource constrained settings. Fairness metrics alone offer useful, but insufficient signals to accurately evaluate candidate LDAs. Rather, by using a horizontal LDA search approach with the relational trade-off framework, we demonstrate a responsible minimum viable LDA search on real-world lending outcomes. Organizations can modify this approach to systematically compare, evaluate, and select LDAs that optimize fairness and accuracy in a sector-based contextualized manner.