David García-Soriano
Francesco Bonchi
ABSTRACT
We study a novel problem of fairness in ranking aimed at minimizing the amount of individual unfairness introduced when enforcing group-fairness constraints. Our proposal is rooted in the distributional maxmin fairness theory, which uses randomization to maximize the expected satisfaction of the worst-off individuals. We devise an exact polynomial-time algorithm to find maxmin-fair distributions of general search problems (including, but not limited to, ranking), and show that our algorithm can produce rankings which, while satisfying the given group-fairness constraints, ensure that the maximum possible value is to individuals.
- [n.d.]. European Commission Diversity Charters. https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/combatting-discrimination/tackling-discrimination/diversity-management/diversity-charters-eu-country_en.Google Scholar
- [n.d.]. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/index.cfm.Google Scholar
- Abolfazl Asudeh, H. V. Jagadish, Julia Stoyanovich, and Gautam Das. 2019. De-signing Fair Ranking Schemes. In SIGMOD. 1259--1276.Google Scholar
- Asia J. Biega, Krishna P. Gummadi, and Gerhard Weikum. 2018. Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankings. In SIGIR. 405--414.Google Scholar
- Gary E Bolton, Jordi Brandts, and Axel Ockenfels. 2005. Fair procedures: Evidence from games involving lotteries. The Economic Journal 115, 506 (2005), 1054--1076.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. Elisa Celis, Anay Mehrotra, and Nisheeth K. Vishnoi. 2020. Interventions for ranking in the presence of implicit bias. In FAT* '20. 369--380.Google Scholar
- L. Elisa Celis, Damian Straszak, and Nisheeth K. Vishnoi. 2018. Ranking with Fairness Constraints. In ICALP.Google Scholar
- Nick Craswell, Onno Zoeter, Michael Taylor, and Bill Ramsey. 2008. An experimental comparison of click position-bias models. In WSDM. 87--94.Google Scholar
- Cynthia Dwork, Moritz Hardt, Toniann Pitassi, Omer Reingold, and Richard Zemel. 2012. Fairness through awareness. In ITCS. 214--226.Google Scholar
- Cynthia Dwork, Michael P. Kim, Omer Reingold, Guy N. Rothblum, and Gal Yona. 2019. Learning from Outcomes: Evidence-Based Rankings. In FOCS. 106--125.Google Scholar
- Yoav Freund and Robert E Schapire. 1999. Adaptive game playing using multiplicative weights. Games and Economic Behavior 29, 1--2 (1999), 79--103.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David García-Soriano and Francesco Bonchi. 2020. Fair-by-design matching. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery (2020), 1--45.Google Scholar
- Sahin Cem Geyik, Stuart Ambler, and Krishnaram Kenthapadi. 2019. Fairness-Aware Ranking in Search & Recommendation Systems with Application to LinkedIn Talent Search. In KDD. 2221--2231.Google Scholar
- Corrado Gini. 1921. Measurement of inequality of incomes. The Economic Journal 31, 121 (1921), 124--126.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Martin Grötschel, László Lovász, and Alexander Schrijver. 1981. The ellipsoid method and its consequences in combinatorial optimization. Combinatorica 1, 2 (1981), 169--197.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Moritz Hardt, Eric Price, and Nati Srebro. 2016. Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning. In NeurIPS. 3315--3323.Google Scholar
- Kalervo Järvelin and Jaana Kekäläinen. 2002. Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. (TOIS) 20, 4 (2002), 422--446.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jovan Karamata. 1932. Sur une inégalité relative aux fonctions convexes. Publications de l'Institut Mathématique 1, 1 (1932), 145--147.Google Scholar
- Michael J. Kearns, Aaron Roth, and Zhiwei Steven Wu. 2017. Meritocratic Fairness for Cross-Population Selection. In ICML. 1828--1836.Google Scholar
- Peter J Lambert. 1992. The distribution and redistribution of income. In Current issues in public sector economics. Springer, 200--226.Google Scholar
- Harikrishna Narasimhan, Andrew Cotter, Maya R. Gupta, and Serena Wang. 2020. Pairwise Fairness for Ranking and Regression. In AAAI.Google Scholar
- John F Nash Jr. 1950. The bargaining problem. Econometrica (1950), 155--162.Google Scholar
- John Rawls. 1971. A theory of justice. MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Stephen Robertson. 1977. The Probability Ranking Principle in IR. Journal of Documentation 33 (12 1977), 294--304.Google Scholar
- Anthony F Shorrocks. 1983. Ranking income distributions. Economica 50, 197 (1983), 3--17.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ashudeep Singh and Thorsten Joachims. 2018. Fairness of Exposure in Rankings. In KDD. 2219--2228.Google Scholar
- Ashudeep Singh and Thorsten Joachims. 2019. Policy Learning for Fairness in Ranking. In NeurIPS. 5427--5437.Google Scholar
- Paul D Thistle. 1989. Ranking distributions with generalized Lorenz curves. Southern Economic Journal (1989), 1--12.Google Scholar
- Yining Wang, Liwei Wang, Yuanzhi Li, Di He, Wei Chen, and Tie-Yan Liu. 2013. A theoretical analysis of NDCG ranking measures. In Proceedings of the 26th annual conference on learning theory (COLT 2013), Vol. 8. 6.Google Scholar
- Ke Yang, Vasilis Gkatzelis, and Julia Stoyanovich. 2019. Balanced Ranking with Diversity Constraints. In IJCAI. 6035--6042.Google Scholar
- Ke Yang and Julia Stoyanovich. 2017. Measuring Fairness in Ranked Outputs. In SSDBM. 22:1--22:6.Google Scholar
- Neal E Young. 1995. Randomized rounding without solving the linear program. In SODA. 170--178.Google Scholar
- Neal E Young. 2001. Sequential and parallel algorithms for mixed packing and covering. In FOCS. 538--546.Google Scholar
- Meike Zehlike, Francesco Bonchi, Carlos Castillo, Sara Hajian, Mohamed Megahed, and Ricardo Baeza-Yates. 2017. FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithm. In CIKM. 1569--1578Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Maxmin-Fair Ranking: Individual Fairness under Group-Fairness Constraints
Recommendations
Performance evaluation of a fair backoff algorithm for IEEE 802.11 DFWMAC
MobiHoc '02: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking & computingDue to hidden terminals and a dynamic topology, contention among stations in an ad-hoc network is not homogeneous. Some stations are at a disadvantage in opportunity of access to the shared channel and can suffer severe throughput degradation when the ...
End-to-end maxmin fairness in multihop wireless networks: Theory and protocol
To promote commercial deployment of multihop wireless networks, the research/industry communities must develop new theories and protocols for flexible traffic engineering in these networks in order to support diverse user applications. This paper ...
Inter-AP coordination for fair throughput in infrastructure-based IEEE 802.11 mesh networks
IWCMC '06: Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on Wireless communications and mobile computingThis paper studies throughput fairness among different basic service sets (BSSs) in infrastructure-based IEEE 802.11 mesh networks, where inter-BSS interference is unavoidable because of the difficulty in frequency and coverage planning and the limited ...
Comments