Skip to main content

Testing, Debugging, and Repairing Individual Discrimination in Machine Learning Models

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ethics in Artificial Intelligence: Bias, Fairness and Beyond

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 1123))

Abstract

Trustworthy AI is crucial for the broad adoption of AI systems. An important question is, therefore, how to ensure this trustworthiness. The absence of algorithmic bias is a crucial attribute for an AI system to be considered trustworthy. In this book chapter, we address various problems related to the detection and mitigation of algorithmic bias in machine learning models, specifically individual discrimination. A model shows individual discrimination if two instances, predominantly differing in protected attributes like race, gender, or age, produce different decision outcomes. In a black-box setting, detecting individual discrimination requires extensive testing. We present a methodology that enables the automatic generation of test inputs with a high likelihood of identifying individual discrimination. Our approach unites the power of two widely recognized techniques, symbolic execution and local explainability, to generate test cases effectively. We further address the problem of localizing individual discrimination failures required for effective model debugging. We introduce a notion called Region of Individual Discrimination or RID, which is an interpretable region in the feature space, described by simple predicates on features, aiming to contain all the discriminatory instances. This region essentially captures the positive correlation between discriminatory instances and features. Finally, we describe a model repair algorithm that aims to repair individual discrimination in the model by effectively creating retraining data based on RID. We empirically show that our approaches are effective for assuring individual fairness of machine learning models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The choice of the training data depends on the debugging stage in Data and AI life cycle. An alternative choice at the model-building phase can be the union of training and validation data. Some debugging can be performed at runtime when several samples fail during runtime. At that point, training, validation, and test set for model M along with runtime workload can also be used.

References

  1. IBM Watson Studio - AutoAI, Last accessed 15th Oct 2020

    Google Scholar 

  2. IBM AIF360, Last accessed 19th Feb 2021

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aggarwal A, Lohia P, Nagar S, Dey K, Saha D (2019) Black box fairness testing of machine learning models. ESEC/FSE

    Google Scholar 

  4. Basu K, Basu T, Buckmire R, Lal N (2019) Predictive models of student college commitment decisions using machine learning. Data 4:65, 05

    Google Scholar 

  5. Binns R (2020) On the apparent conflict between individual and group fairness. In: Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, pp 514–524

    Google Scholar 

  6. Breiman L, Friedman J, Stone CJ, Olshen RA (1984) Classification and regression trees. CRC Press

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cadar C, Ganesh V, Pawlowski PM, Dill DL, Engler DR (2023) Exe: automatically generating inputs of death. In: CCS ’06, pp 322–335

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chakraborty J, Majumder S, Menzies T (2021) Bias in machine learning software: why? how? what to do? Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chung Y, Kraska T, Polyzotis N, Tae KH, Whang SE (2019) Automated data slicing for model validation: a big data-ai integration approach. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 32(12):2284–2296

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cito J, Dillig I, Kim S, Murali V, Chandra S (2021) Explaining mispredictions of machine learning models using rule induction. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM joint meeting on European software engineering conference and symposium on the foundations of software engineering, pp 716–727

    Google Scholar 

  11. Craven MW (1996) Extracting comprehensible models from trained neural networks. PhD thesis. AAI9700774

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dressel J, Farid H (2018) The accuracy, fairness, and limits of predicting recidivism. Sci Adv 4:eaao5580

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dua D, Graff C (2017) UCI machine learning repository

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dwork C, Hardt M, Pitassi T, Reingold O, Zemel R (2012) Fairness through awareness. In: ITCS 2012, pp 214–226

    Google Scholar 

  15. Esteva Andre, Robicquet Alexandre, Ramsundar Bharath, Kuleshov Volodymyr, DePristo Mark, Chou Katherine, Cui Claire, Corrado Greg, Thrun Sebastian, Dean Jeff (2019) A guide to deep learning in healthcare. Nat Med 25(1):24–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Feldman M, Friedler SA, Moeller J, Scheidegger C, Venkatasubramanian S (2015) Certifying and removing disparate impact. In: proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp 259–268

    Google Scholar 

  17. Galhotra S, Brun Y, Meliou A (2017) Fairness testing: testing software for discrimination. In: ESEC/FSE. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 498–510

    Google Scholar 

  18. Godefroid P (2007) Compositional dynamic test generation. In: Proceedings of the 34th annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on principles of programming languages, POPL ’07. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 47–54

    Google Scholar 

  19. Godefroid P, Klarlund N, Sen K (2023) Dart: directed automated random testing. In: PLDI’ 05, pp 213–223

    Google Scholar 

  20. Huang B, Kechadi MT, Buckley B (2012) Customer churn prediction in telecommunications. Expert Syst with Appl 39(1):1414–1425

    Google Scholar 

  21. Joseph M, Kearns M, Morgenstern JH, Roth A (2016) Fairness in learning: classic and contextual bandits. In: Lee D,  Sugiyama M, Luxburg V,  Guyon I, Garnett R (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 29. Curran Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kusner M, Loftus J, Russell C, Silva R (2017) Counterfactual fairness. In: NIPS. Curran Associates Inc, USA, pp 4069–4079

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lahoti P, Weikum G, Gummadi K (2019) ifair: learning individually fair data representations for algorithmic decision making. In: 2019 IEEE 35th international conference on data engineering (ICDE), pp 1334–1345

    Google Scholar 

  24. Le TT, Fu W, Moore JH (2020) Scaling tree-based automated machine learning to biomedical big data with a feature set selector. Bioinformatics 36(1):250–256

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mehrabi N, Morstatter F, Saxena N, Lerman K, Galstyan A (2019) A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. arXiv:1908.09635

  26. Mothilal RK, Sharma A, Tan C (2020) Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual explanations. FAT* ’20

    Google Scholar 

  27. Mukerjee Amitabha, Biswas Rita, Deb Kalyanmoy, Mathur Amrit P (2002) Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for the risk-return trade-off in bank loan management. ITOR 9:583–597

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, Michel V, Thirion B, Grisel O, Blondel M, Prettenhofer P, Weiss R, Dubourg V, Vanderplas J, Passos A, Cournapeau D, Brucher M, Perrot M, Duchesnay E (2011) Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J Mach Learn Res 12:2825–2830

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, Michel V, Thirion B, Grisel O, Blondel M, Prettenhofer P, Weiss R, Dubourg V et al (2011) Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J Mach Learn Res 12:2825–2830

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ribeiro MT, Singh S, Guestrin C (2016) Why should i trust you?: explaining the predictions of any classifier. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, pp 1135–1144

    Google Scholar 

  31. Salimi B, Rodriguez L, Howe B, Suciu D (2019) Interventional fairness: causal database repair for algorithmic fairness. In: Proceedings of the 2019 international conference on management of data, pp 793–810

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sen K, Marinov D, Agha G (2005) Cute: a concolic unit testing engine for c. In: Proceedings of the 10th European software engineering conference held jointly with 13th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering, ESEC/FSE-13. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 263–272

    Google Scholar 

  33. Settles B (2009) Active learning literature survey

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sun Y, Wu M, Ruan W, Huang X, Kwiatkowska M, Kroening D (2018) Concolic testing for deep neural networks

    Google Scholar 

  35. Szegedy C, Zaremba W, Sutskever I, Bruna J, Erhan D, Goodfellow IJ, Fergus R (2013) Intriguing properties of neural networks. CoRR, abs/1312.6199

    Google Scholar 

  36. Tramèr F, Atlidakis V,  Geambasu R,  Hsu D, Hubaux J, Humbert M, Juels A, Lin H (2017) Fairtest: discovering unwarranted associations in data-driven applications. In: 2017 IEEE European symposium on security and privacy (EuroS P), pp 401–416

    Google Scholar 

  37. Udeshi S, Arora P, Chattopadhyay S (2018) Automated directed fairness testing. ASE

    Google Scholar 

  38. Zhang P, Wang J, Sun J, Dong G, Wang X, Wang X, Dong JS, Dai T (2020) White-box fairness testing through adversarial sampling. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd international conference on software engineering, pp 949–960, 2020

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diptikalyan Saha .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Institution of Engineers (India)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Saha, D., Agarwal, A., Hans, S., Haldar, S. (2023). Testing, Debugging, and Repairing Individual Discrimination in Machine Learning Models. In: Mukherjee, A., Kulshrestha, J., Chakraborty, A., Kumar, S. (eds) Ethics in Artificial Intelligence: Bias, Fairness and Beyond. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 1123. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7184-8_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics