I. Oliveira e Silva

I. Oliveira e Silva, C. Soares, I. Sousa et al.

Arbitrary, inconsistent, or faulty decision-making raises serious concerns, and preventing unfair models is an increasingly important challenge in Machine Learning. Data often reflect past discriminatory behavior, and models trained on such data may reflect bias on sensitive attributes, such as gender, race, or age. One approach to developing fair models is to preprocess the training data to remove the underlying biases while preserving the relevant information, for example, by correcting biased labels. While multiple label noise correction methods are available, the information about their behavior in identifying discrimination is very limited. In this work, we develop an empirical methodology to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of label noise correction techniques in ensuring the fairness of models trained on biased datasets. Our methodology involves manipulating the amount of label noise and can be used with fairness benchmarks but also with standard ML datasets. We apply the methodology to analyze six label noise correction methods according to several fairness metrics on standard OpenML datasets. Our results suggest that the Hybrid Label Noise Correction method achieves the best trade-off between predictive performance and fairness. Clustering-Based Correction can reduce discrimination the most, however, at the cost of lower predictive performance.

Inês Oliveira e Silva, Sérgio Jesus, Iker Perez et al.

Shapley values are a cornerstone of explainable AI, yet their proliferation into competing formulations has created a fragmented landscape with little consensus on practical deployment. While theoretical differences are well-documented, evaluation remains reliant on quantitative proxies whose alignment with human utility is unverified. In this work, we use a unified amortized framework to isolate semantic differences between eight Shapley variants under the low-latency constraints of operational risk workflows. We conduct a large-scale empirical evaluation across four risk datasets and a realistic fraud-detection environment involving professional analysts and 3,735 case reviews. Our results reveal a fundamental misalignment: standard quantitative metrics, such as sparsity and faithfulness, are decoupled from human-perceived clarity and decision utility. Furthermore, while no formulation improved objective analyst performance, explanations consistently increased decision confidence, signaling a critical risk of automation bias in high-stakes settings. These findings suggest that current evaluation proxies are insufficient for predicting downstream human impact, and we provide evidence-based guidance for selecting formulations and metrics in operational decision systems.

Sérgio Jesus, Pedro Saleiro, Inês Oliveira e Silva et al.

Aequitas Flow is an open-source framework and toolkit for end-to-end Fair Machine Learning (ML) experimentation, and benchmarking in Python. This package fills integration gaps that exist in other fair ML packages. In addition to the existing audit capabilities in Aequitas, the Aequitas Flow module provides a pipeline for fairness-aware model training, hyperparameter optimization, and evaluation, enabling easy-to-use and rapid experiments and analysis of results. Aimed at ML practitioners and researchers, the framework offers implementations of methods, datasets, metrics, and standard interfaces for these components to improve extensibility. By facilitating the development of fair ML practices, Aequitas Flow hopes to enhance the incorporation of fairness concepts in AI systems making AI systems more robust and fair.