Exchanging Lessons Between Algorithmic Fairness and Domain Generalization

Elliot Creager, Joern-Henrik Jacobsen, Richard Zemel

Keywords: algorithmic fairness, domain generalization, representation learning, invariance

Abstract: Standard learning approaches are designed to perform well on average for the data distribution available at training time. Developing learning approaches that are not overly sensitive to the training distribution is central to research on domain- or out-of-distribution generalization, robust optimization and fairness. In this work we focus on links between research on domain generalization and algorithmic fairness---where performance under a distinct but related test distributions is studied---and show how the two fields can be mutually beneficial. While domain generalization methods typically rely on knowledge of disjoint "domains" or "environments", "sensitive" label information indicating which demographic groups are at risk of discrimination is often used in the fairness literature. Drawing inspiration from recent fairness approaches that improve worst-case performance without knowledge of sensitive groups, we propose a novel domain generalization method that handles the more realistic scenario where environment partitions are not provided. We then show theoretically and empirically how different partitioning schemes can lead to increased or decreased generalization performance, enabling us to outperform Invariant Risk Minimization with handcrafted environments in multiple cases. We also show how a re-interpretation of IRMv1 allows us for the first time to directly optimize a common fairness criterion, group-sufficiency, and thereby improve performance on a fair prediction task.

One-sentence Summary: Drawing inspiration from recent fairness approaches, we propose a novel domain generalization method that outperforms IRM on the CMNIST dataset without requiring knowledge of the environment splits.

Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics

Reviewed Version (pdf): https://openreview.net/references/pdf?id=PQnjFCa6ZO