TY - JOUR
T1 - The (Im)possibility of fairness
AU - Friedler, Sorelle A.
AU - Scheidegger, Carlos
AU - Venkatasubramanian, Suresh
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgments. This research was funded in part by the NSF under grants IIS-1251049, CNS-1302688, IIS- 1513651, IIS-1633724, and IIS-1633387. Thanks to the attendees at the Dagstuhl Workshop on Data Responsibly for their helpful comments, and to Cong Yu, Michael Hay, Nicholas Diakopoulos and Solon Barocas. We also thank Tion-ney Nix, Tosin Alliyu, Andrew Selbst, danah boyd, Karen Levy, Seda Gürses, Michael Ekstrand, Vivek Srikumar, and Hannah Sassaman and the community at Data & Society.
PY - 2021/4
Y1 - 2021/4
N2 - Automated decision-making systems commonly determine criminal sentences, hiring choices, and loan applications. This widespread deployment is concerning, since these systems have the potential to discriminate against people based on their demographic characteristics. Current sentencing risk assessments are racially biased, and job advertisements discriminate on gender. These concerns have led to the growth in fairness-aware machine learning, a field that aims to enable algorithmic systems that are fair by design. To design fair systems, researchers must agree on what it means to be fair. Researchers introduce a framework for understanding these different definitions of fairness and how they relate to each other. The framework shows the definitions of fairness and their implementations correspond to different axiomatic beliefs about the world.
AB - Automated decision-making systems commonly determine criminal sentences, hiring choices, and loan applications. This widespread deployment is concerning, since these systems have the potential to discriminate against people based on their demographic characteristics. Current sentencing risk assessments are racially biased, and job advertisements discriminate on gender. These concerns have led to the growth in fairness-aware machine learning, a field that aims to enable algorithmic systems that are fair by design. To design fair systems, researchers must agree on what it means to be fair. Researchers introduce a framework for understanding these different definitions of fairness and how they relate to each other. The framework shows the definitions of fairness and their implementations correspond to different axiomatic beliefs about the world.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85103175295&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85103175295&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/3433949
DO - 10.1145/3433949
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85103175295
SN - 0001-0782
VL - 64
SP - 136
EP - 143
JO - Communications of the ACM
JF - Communications of the ACM
IS - 4
ER -