Literature DB >> 33733152

On Consequentialism and Fairness.

Dallas Card1, Noah A Smith2,3.   

Abstract

Recent work on fairness in machine learning has primarily emphasized how to define, quantify, and encourage "fair" outcomes. Less attention has been paid, however, to the ethical foundations which underlie such efforts. Among the ethical perspectives that should be taken into consideration is consequentialism, the position that, roughly speaking, outcomes are all that matter. Although consequentialism is not free from difficulties, and although it does not necessarily provide a tractable way of choosing actions (because of the combined problems of uncertainty, subjectivity, and aggregation), it nevertheless provides a powerful foundation from which to critique the existing literature on machine learning fairness. Moreover, it brings to the fore some of the tradeoffs involved, including the problem of who counts, the pros and cons of using a policy, and the relative value of the distant future. In this paper we provide a consequentialist critique of common definitions of fairness within machine learning, as well as a machine learning perspective on consequentialism. We conclude with a broader discussion of the issues of learning and randomization, which have important implications for the ethics of automated decision making systems.
Copyright © 2020 Card and Smith.

Entities:  

Keywords:  consequentialism; ethics; fairness; machine learning; randomization

Year:  2020        PMID: 33733152      PMCID: PMC7861221          DOI: 10.3389/frai.2020.00034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Artif Intell        ISSN: 2624-8212


  5 in total

1.  How (and where) does moral judgment work?

Authors:  Joshua Greene; Jonathan Haidt
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2002-12-01       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  Fair Prediction with Disparate Impact: A Study of Bias in Recidivism Prediction Instruments.

Authors:  Alexandra Chouldechova
Journal:  Big Data       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.128

3.  Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research.

Authors:  B Freedman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1987-07-16       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Adaptive design of confirmatory trials: Advances and challenges.

Authors:  Tze Leung Lai; Philip W Lavori; Ka Wai Tsang
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2015-06-14       Impact factor: 2.226

  5 in total
  2 in total

1.  Five sources of bias in natural language processing.

Authors:  Dirk Hovy; Shrimai Prabhumoye
Journal:  Lang Linguist Compass       Date:  2021-08-20

2.  Are AI systems biased against the poor? A machine learning analysis using Word2Vec and GloVe embeddings.

Authors:  Georgina Curto; Mario Fernando Jojoa Acosta; Flavio Comim; Begoña Garcia-Zapirain
Journal:  AI Soc       Date:  2022-06-28
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.