Measuring the Impact of Equal Treatment as Blindness via Distributions of Explanations Disparity
Keywords: Fairness, Audits, Explanations
TL;DR: We propose a new measure of fairness using feature attributions distributions inspired in the criticism of liberal oriented political philosophy
Abstract: Liberal political philosophy advocates for the policy of \emph{equal treatment as blindness}, which seeks to achieve fairness by treating individuals without considering their protected characteristics directly. However, this policy has faced longstanding criticism for perpetuating existing inequalities. In machine learning, this policy can be translated into the concept of \emph{fairness as unawareness}, and be measured using disparate treatment metrics such as Demographic Parity (a.k.a. Statistical Parity). Our analysis reveals that Demographic Parity does not faithfully measure whether individuals are being treated independently of the protected attribute by the model. We introduce the Explanation Disparity metric to measure fairness under \emph{equal treatment as blindness} policy. Our metric evaluates the fairness of predictive models by analyzing the extent to which the protected attribute can be inferred from the distribution of explanation values, specifically using Shapley values. The proposed metric tests for statistical independence of the explanation distributions over populations with different protected characteristics. We show the theoretical properties of "Explanation Disparity" and devise an equal treatment inspector based on the AUC of a Classifier Two-Sample Test. We experiment with synthetic and natural data to demonstrate and compare the notion with related ones. We release \texttt{explanationspace}, an open-source Python package with methods and tutorials
Primary Area: alignment, fairness, safety, privacy, and societal considerations
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.
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Reciprocal Reviewing: I understand the reciprocal reviewing requirement as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/CallForPapers. If none of the authors are registered as a reviewer, it may result in a desk rejection at the discretion of the program chairs. To request an exception, please complete this form at https://forms.gle/Huojr6VjkFxiQsUp6.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 6261
Loading