Algorithmic Fairness

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

29 papers in the last four weeks, up 71% on the four weeks before. 0.3% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 275

Oct 7, 2026cs.LG

Robust Decentralized Fairness Auditing

Emerging legislation requires large language models (LLMs) to be audited for compliance with regulatory standards, particularly fairness. Such black-box audits typically assume a single auditor with access to a large, representative set of queries. In practice, it can be difficult for an auditor to obtain such a query set, but multiple auditors can together cover the relevant demographic groups by auditing the LLM collaboratively with their individual query sets. However, relying on multiple auditors raises a fundamental trust problem, as they may act on behalf of the LLM provider to portray a misleading appearance of fairness, i.e., fairwashing. We propose Auditopus, a novel approach for robust decentralized fairness auditing. In Auditopus, auditing proceeds in rounds without a central server. In each round, every auditor issues a fixed number of queries to the LLM, and sends only cumulative statistics vectors of its query results to other auditors instead of sensitive queries in clear. The fairness of the audited LLM is then estimated by aggregating all the vectors. We show theoretically and empirically that even a single adversarial auditor in the network can steer this estimate by fabricating the vectors it sends, making an unfair LLM appear fair. To address this threat, Auditopus has each honest auditor locally down-weight any auditor whose cumulative statistics vectors are statistically inconsistent with previous ones. We implement Auditopus and compare it to robust aggregation baselines on two datasets with two pre-trained LLMs. Against an attacker that optimizes the vectors it sends to make the LLM appear fair, Auditopus reduces audit error by up to 78% on average relative to no defense and at least 62% relative to the robust aggregation baselines. Even when 49% of the auditors are adversarial, Auditopus never lets a very unfair or moderately unfair LLM pass as fair.

Sayan Biswas, Jade Garcia Bourrée, Anne-Marie Kermarrec +2

EPFL, Switzerland

Algorithmic Auditing LLM Auditing Algorithmic Fairness

Oct 6, 2026cs.AI

Justice After Identity: Large Language Models and the View from Everywhere

The search for a common view of justice and fairness has challenged human collective activity, as our diverging judgments are unavoidably shaped by the self-interests of social position, personal benefit, cultural inheritance, and historical circumstance. John Rawls famously attempted to overcome this limitation through popularizing a philosophical tradition known by the phrase "the original position" - a thought experiment by which people select principles of justice without knowing the identities or advantages they will possess. Critics, however, have long questioned whether people can meaningfully suspend their social identities and suppress morally relevant forms of lived experience. Artificial intelligence engaged to calculate algorithmic and agentic fairness introduces a novel possibility. LLMs have no singular class, race, gender, nationality, or biography, yet their parameters encode linguistic representations of a vast range of human identities and moral traditions. Perhaps the ethical judgments of LLMs could approximate an integrative original position - a "view from everywhere" generated not by excluding social identities but by computationally incorporating their diversity.It is unlikely that humankind will "hand over the keys" to computational systems by simply delegating complete agentic control of distributive and procedural collective processes. But AI may play a role, perhaps a positive one, interacting with individual and collective human judgment as we often confront increasingly polarized views on what is fair and just. We present data comparing human, base model, and frontier/fine-tuned model judgments about classic moral dilemmas while systematically varying identity relationships and Rawlsian constraints on identity. We conclude by speculating whether, if advanced AI systems provide humans with thoughtful advice, humans would actually be likely to accept it.

W. Russell Neuman

Moral Reasoning in Language Models Moral Reasoning Human-AI Decision Making Algorithmic Fairness

Oct 5, 2026cs.CV

FairRSFM: A Biome-Aware Benchmark and Debiasing Framework for Remote Sensing Foundation Models

Remote sensing foundation models (RSFMs) are commonly evaluated using aggregate metrics, which can hide systematic performance disparities across ecological regions. We introduce FairRSFM, a biome-aware benchmark for evaluating ecological group robustness in RSFMs. FairRSFM maps georeferenced samples from 14 terrestrial biome classes into six ecologically meaningful macro-groups and evaluates models under a unified frozen-backbone evaluation protocol. The benchmark covers four downstream datasets: m-EuroSAT, m-BigEarthNet, m-SA-Crop-Type, and MMEarth20K with Dynamic World label maps. Using Prithvi-EO-2.0, SatMAE, and DOFA across three random seeds, we show that aggregate performance consistently masks biome-dependent disparities across architectures and tasks. For example, Prithvi-EO-2.0 reaches 90.98% overall macro-F1 on m-EuroSAT but a mean worst-group score of only 83.72%, while m-SA-Crop-Type drops from 27.30% overall mIoU to 18.47% in the Xeric and Mineralogical group. We further evaluate Biome-Orthogonal Linear Probing (BOLP), Dynamic Biome Reweighting (DBR), and GroupDRO as complementary mitigation baselines. Their effectiveness is model- and task-dependent; for example, BOLP improves Prithvi-EO-2.0 worst-group F1@opt on m-BigEarthNet from 46.12% to 50.27% without updating the RSFM backbone. FairRSFM provides a reusable protocol for diagnosing and mitigating ecological robustness gaps in remote sensing foundation models. Code and datasets are available at: https://github.com/aminurhossain/FairRSFM.

Md Aminur Hossain, Omkumar Vaghasiya, Rajeev Ranjan Dwivedi +2

Space Applications Centre, ISRO, Ahmedabad, India · Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Bhopal, Bhopal, India · Centre of Studies in Resources Engineering (CSRE), Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India

Geospatial Foundation Models Neural Network Robustness Algorithmic Fairness Remote Sensing Remote Sensing Benchmarks

Oct 1, 2026cs.LG

Debias Anything: Fairness with Diversity without Supervision in Diffusion Models

Although diffusion models produce high-quality images, they also reproduce and amplify demographic imbalances in their training data. Debiasing their generation process post-training w.r.t. some sensitive attribute usually relies on classifier guidance or explicit text extra-conditioning, but this reduces methods' applicability and output diversity. Conversely, methods promoting diversity alone do not ensure fair attribute representation. In this paper, we propose a method tackling fairness and diversity jointly that is generally applicable to any diffusion model and any sensitive attribute. To this end, an adapter connects the frozen diffusion model to a pretrained vision-language embedding space, enabling fairness and diversity guidance without sensitive-attribute annotations. For fairness, pairs of text prompts define attribute directions which guide batch composition towards specific proportions. For diversity, we introduce a score measuring disagreement between the semantic estimates derived from this representation. The formulation supports unconditional and text-conditional diffusion models, while requiring no prior knowledge or data of sensitive attribute. Experiments confirm that our method improves quality and diversity scores at comparable fairness levels.

Théau d'Audiffret, Mariia Vladimirova, Jean-Yves Franceschi

Criteo AI Lab, Paris, France · ESSEC Business School, France · CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-Saclay, France +1

Diffusion Model Guidance Debiased ML Algorithmic Fairness Generative Modeling Demographic Bias in T2I Models Diffusion Models

Oct 1, 2026cs.LG

Beyond Demographic Balance: Multi-Metric and Intersectional Evaluation of Fairness in MIMIC-IV Mortality Prediction

Fairness conclusions in clinical prediction can depend strongly on both the metrics reported and the demographic resolution at which performance is evaluated. We revisit these evaluation choices for ICU mortality prediction on MIMIC-IV, comparing predictive-utility and subgroup-error metrics across several fairness interventions. As a complementary case study, we introduce a lightweight adaptation strategy that jointly balances ethnicity--gender--insurance representation without conditioning on mortality outcomes, allowing demographic representation balancing to be examined separately from outcome-conditioned or direct error-rate interventions. We evaluate its behavior at both marginal and corresponding three-way intersectional subgroup levels, while accounting for the statistical support of finer-grained estimates. The results show that interventions can receive substantially different assessments across accuracy/AUROC, sensitivity, and false-positive rate, and that marginal demographic summaries can conceal heterogeneous error profiles within their constituent intersections, including among larger subgroups. These findings highlight the importance of evaluating fairness interventions at both complementary metric and subgroup resolutions, while accounting for the intervention target and the reliability of subgroup estimates.

Abdullah Al Noman, Fahmid Al Rifat, Tahrima Hashem +3

Virginia Tech Blacksburg, Virginia, USA · University of Texas at Arlington Arlington, Texas, USA · University of Melbourne Melbourne, Victoria, Australia +3

Algorithmic Fairness Intersectional Fairness Mortality Prediction

Oct 1, 2026cs.LG

Minimax Optimal Regret for Causal Logistic Bandits with Counterfactual Fairness

We study causal logistic bandits with counterfactual fairness constraints. The causal structure is given through known factual and counterfactual feature maps that share an unknown logistic reward parameter, but the learner observes only factual rewards. Consequently, the directions determining counterfactual feasibility need not be identifiable from the available feedback. The closest prior analyses either omit a coverage condition or impose a comparatively strong one, and do not establish matching lower bounds. We first show that some coverage condition is necessary: without a coverage-type restriction, factually indistinguishable environments with different optimal fair actions force

Ω(T)

expected joint loss. Under a weaker full-rank condition on the factual covariance pooled across actions, we identify a target-specific information scale

V_\star

that measures the difficulty of estimating rewards and counterfactual effects from factual feedback. We construct worst-case families satisfying this condition on which every policy incurs expected joint loss

Ω\left(\left[V_\star\min\{\log K,d\}\right]^{1/3}T^{2/3}\right)

. We also give an explore--then--exploit procedure tuned using

V_\star

and an adaptive algorithm that does not require its value. Both algorithms achieve

\max\{R_T,V_T\}=\widetilde{O}\left(\left[V_\star\min\{\log K,d\}\right]^{1/3}T^{2/3}+κd/σ_0^2\right)

, where

R_T

is regret relative to the best fair action and

V_T

denotes the cumulative stage-wise positive violations. Thus the upper and lower bounds match in their leading dependence on

T

,

V_\star

, and

\min\{\log K,d\}

, up to logarithmic factors.

Junhyuk Huh, Seoungbin Bae, Dabeen Lee

Faculty of Mathematics, University of Cambridge · Department of Industrial & Systems Engineering, KAIST · Department of Mathematical Sciences, Seoul National University

Multi-Armed Bandits Minimax Regret Algorithmic Fairness Counterfactual Fairness Regret Minimization

Oct 1, 2026stat.ML

Tolerance-Based Fairness Auditing: Violation Certification and Sensitivity Screening

As artificial intelligence is increasingly deployed, algorithmic unfairness has raised growing concerns and intensified demands for transparent fairness auditing. In practice, the tolerable degree of algorithmic unfairness depends on the specific legal, ethical, or application context. Given a prespecified tolerance threshold, an important statistical question is how to determine whether a group disparity exceeds the allowable tolerance across different auditing objectives. To address this problem, we develop a unified tolerance-based fairness auditing framework for two complementary auditing objectives: violation certification, which prioritizes control of false violation declarations, and sensitivity screening, which prioritizes reducing missed violations. For the first objective, we develop a constrained empirical likelihood test for formal settings that uses least-favorable-point calibration and can be combined with false flagging rate control for simultaneous subgroup auditing. For the second objective, we develop split empirical likelihood and adjusted split empirical likelihood tests using an adaptive boundary-proxy principle for early-warning settings. Numerical experiments show the distinct error-control--sensitivity trade-offs of these procedures. A COMPAS analysis illustrates the framework in predictive fairness auditing.

Jie Tang, Chuanlong Xie, Lixing Zhu

School of Statistics, Beijing Normal University, Zhuhai, Guangdong 519087, China

Algorithmic Auditing Algorithmic Fairness Group Fairness

Sep 30, 2026cs.LG

Efficient Active Auditing of Multi-Group Fairness with Bias Probes

Over the past decade, Machine Learning (ML) has been trained under dual objectives: minimizing prediction error via Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) while controlling unfairness bias. In practice, however, fairness-aware training often yields limited improvements over standard ERM, making reliable post hoc auditing essential. Existing auditing approaches for black-box models either rely on model reconstruction --exposing systems to extraction attacks-- or directly estimate fairness metrics, offering limited insight into which regions of the data distribution drive bias. More fundamentally, property-specific auditing --aimed at extracting only targeted fairness information without reconstructing the model-- remains poorly understood. In this work, we introduce the bias probe framework, which enables targeted and adaptive querying to reveal bias structure while preserving model confidentiality. Building on this framework, we propose ALeBi, an active auditor that learns such probes to efficiently estimate multi-group fairness metrics. We establish novel sample complexity guarantees governed by a property-specific complexity measure, resolving a previously posed open question, and extend our analysis to adversarial settings where the model owner may strategically obscure bias. Our results uncover a fundamental trade-off between model confidentiality and reliable auditing, and show that property-specific probing enables both accurate estimation and interpretable identification of high and low-bias regions. Extensive experiments support our theoretical findings and demonstrate the practical effectiveness of our approach.

Ayoub Ajarra, Debabrota Basu

´Equipe Scool, Univ. Lille, Inria, CNRS, Centrale Lille, UMR 9189- CRIStAL

Algorithmic Fairness Group Fairness Black-Box Model Auditing

Sep 30, 2026cs.LG

A Rank Graduation metric for Algorithmic fairness

Fairness assessment in algorithmic decisions that affect individuals, such as credit scoring, often relies on parity measures calculated at the aggregate group level. Such measures may not reveal which individuals experience unfairness or which explanatory factors contribute to it. In this paper, we propose a rank-based framework that evaluates fairness through the distribution of model prediction errors, thereby linking fairness assessment with predictive accuracy and explainability. The framework combines Rank Graduation Fairness (RGF), its integrated measure AURGF, a centered Cramer--von Mises permutation test, and a feature removal procedure for fairness explainability. We evaluate the methodology using logistic regression, random forest, gradient boosting, and a multilayer perceptron. The simulation study shows that protected-group imbalance can reverse descriptive fairness comparisons, whereas the proposed inferential procedure correctly distinguishes fair from unfair mechanisms. Its application to HMDA mortgage data produces model rankings that differ from those obtained with classical fairness criteria. Tree-based models, rather than logistic regression, provide the strongest combination of predictive accuracy and rank-based fairness, while the fairness null hypothesis is rejected for all four models. The persistence of disparity across statistical, bagging, boosting, and neural network specifications, together with the feature removal results, indicates that the observed unfairness is not specific to a single algorithm or predictor, but is associated with group differences embedded in the characteristics of the lending data. These findings support a broader approach to trustworthy artificial intelligence that combines predictive accuracy, fairness measurement, statistical inference, and explainability.

Dalia Atif, Paolo Giudici

Algorithmic Auditing Algorithmic Fairness

Sep 29, 2026cs.HC

Fairness Theatre: Evaluating Post-Hoc Fairness Interventions in Vendor-Controlled Early Warning Systems

Public institutions increasingly procure AI systems whose design they cannot inspect or change. In higher education, proprietary Early Warning Systems (EWS) leave colleges with few options beyond adjusting model outputs to address inequity. This raises the question of how fairness work is coordinated among vendors, institutions, advisors, and students with unequal power to change these systems? Using student records from a public college in Ontario, Canada, we evaluate six post-hoc fairness interventions on a research EWS under simulated procurement constraints. We compare fairness, accuracy, and demographic disparities, introducing error-type profiling to trace how interventions redistribute false positives and false negatives. Interventions redistributed disparities without consistently reducing them. Two implementations favored already-advantaged groups because they used group size to define disadvantage; small, marginalized groups remained poorly served. These findings show how procurement constraints and implementation choices shape the possibilities for fairness work. We call the resulting condition fairness theatre; dashboard metrics converge while groups' error burdens persist or worsen.

Kelly McConvey, Angelina Zhai, Rebecca Li +1

University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada · Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Algorithmic Auditing Algorithmic Fairness Group Fairness

Sep 29, 2026cs.SD

Pruning for Efficiency, Paying in Fairness: Demographic Disparities in Pruned Speech-LLMs

Speech-LLMs are expensive to run, making compression important for real-world deployment. However, compressed models are usually selected using aggregate word error rate (WER), which can hide how pruning affects different demographic groups. In this work, we systematically study the effect of audio encoder pruning on SLAM-ASR for different demographic groups. Using the Fair-Speech and Common Voice datasets, we found that the pruning does not affect all demographic groups equally; the gap between best- and worst-performing groups increases in fold. These disparities appear across all three encoder scales, but only the largest model initially hides them behind aggregate WER. LoRA adaptation improves WER for every group, but benefits groups already performing well more strongly and widens for certain groups. On Common Voice English, Danish, and Dutch, accent gaps persist but do not clearly widen, showing that the fairness effects of pruning vary across datasets and must be measured directly. Our findings suggest that for pruned models, deployment decisions should include per-group WER, with the worst-performing group's error rate as an explicit criterion.

Ganesh Pavan Kartikeya Bharadwaj Kolluri, Michael Kampouridis, Ravi Shekhar

School of Computer Science and Electronic Engineering, University of Essex, UK

LLM Pruning Algorithmic Fairness Demographic Bias in ASR Speech Language Models Demographic Bias in Language Models

Sep 29, 2026cs.LG

A Comprehensive View of Fairness through Distributional Stability

We view fairness as a property of distributional stability. Rather than assessing a predictor under a fixed data distribution, we study how its predictions change under perturbations that modify the composition of protected groups. A predictor is fair if it remains stable under such shifts. Under this perspective, several classical notions of fairness arise as stability with respect to specific perturbations, with the associated unfairness gap given by a Lipschitz constant of a prediction-rate functional. This formulation also yields guarantees that hold uniformly over a range of demographic compositions at test time, without requiring knowledge of the deployment distribution. It leads to a learning procedure based on convex combinations of reweighted predictors, formulated as a second-order cone program, for which we establish generalization bounds. Experiments on standard benchmarks illustrate the approach.

Gayane Taturyan, Charlotte Laclau, Stephan Clémencon

LTCI, Télécom Paris, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France

Distribution Shift Robustness Algorithmic Fairness Distributionally Robust Optimization Group Fairness

Sep 29, 2026cs.AI

FairDiff: Mitigating the Self-Reinforcing Matthew Effect in Diffusion Recommender Models

While the "Matthew Effect" and filter bubbles are widely recognized outcome-level biases in recommender systems, we reveal that Diffusion Recommender Models (DRMs) uniquely compound this issue through their generative dynamics. Rather than merely inheriting data imbalances, DRMs trigger a self-reinforcing amplification of popularity bias. We identify that this phenomenon is driven by two compounding mechanisms. First, while optimization loss is universally dominated by high-frequency items across recommenders, DRMs suffer from a unique structural prior mismatch during generation. Because the forward terminal distribution of long-tailed data deviates significantly from the standard Gaussian prior, reverse sampling trajectories inherently collapse toward high-density popular items, fundamentally suppressing niche item generation. To dismantle this self-reinforcing loop, we propose FairDiff, a plug-and-play fairness-aware diffusion framework. To overcome the popularity-dominated loss, we introduce Popularity Condition Guidance (PCG). Rather than altering the training objective, PCG acts as an inference-time distributional reweighting mechanism, mathematically reshaping the score-based gradient field to penalize high-popularity regions and guide trajectories toward niche semantics. Furthermore, we design a Semantic Calibration (SC) Module to bridge the prior mismatch, aligning the forward and reverse distributions via one-step optimal transport. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate that FairDiff achieves state-of-the-art performance while effectively mitigating the self-reinforcing Matthew Effect, highlighting its value as a general framework for DRMs.

Song-Li Wu, Xianquan Wang, Zhaocheng Du +2

Tsinghua University · University of Science and Technology of China · Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab

Diffusion Guidance Algorithmic Fairness Recommender Systems

Sep 28, 2026eess.IV

CAMEO: A Class-Activation-Mapped Equitable Overlay Framework for Fair and Robust Deep Learning-based Skin Condition Diagnosis

Deep learning classifiers for dermoscopic skin lesions often reach high in-distribution accuracy while quietly relying on spurious background cues such as skin tone, device vignetting, and embedded rulers, rather than on lesion morphology. This undermines robustness and fairness across skin tones. This work asks whether Explainable AI (XAI), typically used only to audit a finished model, can instead be repurposed as an active training signal that corrects this shortcut without sacrificing diagnostic accuracy. We introduce CAMEO (Class Activation Mapped Equitable Overlay), a framework that improves skin-lesion classification by selecting stable model explanations and using them to separate lesions from their backgrounds. It then replaces the background with realistic synthetic skin while keeping the lesion unchanged. On HAM10000 and dark-skin ISIC images, CAMEO maintained accuracy while reducing background-driven errors by nearly four times. It also made the model's attention more consistent when backgrounds changed. Results across multiple tests show that reducing reliance on background information improves robustness, with Fitzpatrick-based backgrounds providing a realistic and interpretable approach. Results show that XAI-guided augmentation can make dermoscopic classifiers measurably more robust and fair at no cost to accuracy. They also clarify that it is the mechanism and not the specific tone palette that matters, and that the lasting contribution of XAI here lies in stability-screened, annotation-free lesion localisation rather than in the robustness number itself.

Youssef Attia, Debasmita Mukherjee

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada

Skin Lesion Classification Algorithmic Fairness Explainable Medical Image Analysis Shortcut Learning

Sep 27, 2026cs.LG

Investigating the Effect of k-NN Preprocessing on Developing Graph Neural Networks: A Fairness-Based Perspective

In this paper, a methodology to design fair graph convolutional neural networks (GCNs) is developed and tested over several application data sets. The graphs that are used as inputs to the network are constructed by a k-nearest neighbor-based preprocessing procedure, while fairness issues are considered in terms of the equalized odds criterion. To effectively incorporate the above heterogenous information, the equalized odds criterion is directly embedded into the model's optimization objective through an additional fairness-driven loss functional term. The proposed methodology investigates how varying the neighborhood size in the k-NN algorithm during graph construction influences both the classification performance and the fairness of the resulting models. Extensive experimentation is conducted on three real-world tabular datasets with known biases, evaluating the interplay between graph structure and fairness enforcement. The results demonstrate that the choice of the value of the parameter k critically impacts the performance trends, either steadily improving or peaking at intermediate values depending on dataset characteristics, while the application of fairness constraints significantly mitigates disparities in false positive and false negative rates across groups defined by the protected variable at hand, without incurring major sacrifices in overall accuracy. This study highlights the importance of jointly optimizing the graph construction process and fairness objectives in GCN-based learning, providing a systematic approach toward building more equitable and effective graph-based models.

Nikolaos Zafeiropoulos, Emmanouil Mavrikos, George E. Tsekouras

Department of Cultural Technology and Communication University of the Aegean Mytilene, Greece

Graph Neural Networks Algorithmic Fairness Group Fairness k-Nearest Neighbors

Sep 24, 2026cs.AI

The Gold in Bias: Maturing the AI Design Process through Verification

Bias in AI systems is typically framed as a flaw to be minimized, yet it also serves as a critical indicator of underlying weaknesses in data, modeling assumptions, and system design. Existing approaches often treat bias as an isolated problem rather than as evidence that can strengthen verification and governance across the AI lifecycle. This paper aims to reconceptualize bias as a diagnostic tool that supports rigorous AI verification. We seek to develop a multidimensional framework to analyze bias, demonstrate how biases emerge in both Traditional and Generative AI, and provide a structured pathway for verification-driven mitigation. We present a multidimensional framework analyzing bias across four dimensions: origin sources, emergence points throughout the AI modeling lifecycle, technical and methodological causes, and validation approaches for detection and mitigation. Through a comprehensive typology spanning traditional and generative AI systems, we demonstrate how biases manifest and propagate across development stages. Our analysis encompasses 30 distinct bias types, 16 verification methods, and 20 countermeasures, providing an actionable roadmap for practitioners. We introduce a hierarchical evidence framework that distinguishes internal validity (mechanistic integrity of AI systems) from external validity (contextual reliability in deployment environments). The framework reveals how biases manifest and propagate across modeling stages, enabling systematic mapping between bias types, verification techniques, and effective countermeasures. The proposed evidence hierarchy clarifies how different verification strategies contribute to mechanistic integrity and contextual reliability. We advocate for ''Ethics by Design'' principles that integrate bias verification throughout the development lifecycle, enabling the construction of fairer, more robust, and trustworthy AI systems.

Samira Maghool, Paolo Ceravolo

Pegaso University, Italy · University of Milan, Italy

Algorithmic Fairness Algorithmic Bias AI Governance

Sep 23, 2026cs.MA

Compliant with Local Controls, Collectively Discriminatory. A Governance Architecture for Multi-Agent AI in Regulated Finance

Financial institutions are beginning to deploy agentic workflows in credit, fraud, collections, compliance, and operational control. Governance remains largely component-centric: each model or agent is specified, tested, authorized, and monitored locally. That is insufficient when institutional risk arises from the joint behavior of many locally acceptable components. We call this gap constitutional non-compositionality: local compliance checks need not compose into acceptable collective outcomes such as bounded disparate impact, market integrity, or traceable accountability. We propose ARIA as a finance-specific reference architecture and falsifiable research agenda for agent-population governance. It organizes six capabilities across normative-accountability, execution-control, and assurance-learning planes: policy specification, population-level observed-versus-expected behavior monitoring (M2), bounded authority, runtime containment, adaptive policy change, and preserved human oversight competence. Two simulations illustrate shared-signal thin-file exclusion under local controls and earlier warning from observed-versus-expected distributional monitoring in a constructed drift regime. The contribution maps these controls to fair-lending, EU AI Act, model-risk, and conduct-supervision evidence needs, and closes with a validation agenda rather than a production-effectiveness claim.

Jose Manuel de la Chica Rodriguez, Juan Manuel Vera Diaz, Pablo Delgado Romero

Santander AI Lab, Grupo Santander, Madrid, Spain

Financial Services Algorithmic Fairness AI Agent Monitoring Runtime Enforcement for AI Agents AI Agent Governance AI Governance

Sep 23, 2026cs.CL

Consequential Behaviour and Representational Fairness in the Validation of Synthetic Research

Researchers in industry and academia use synthetic survey respondents powered by large language models as substitutes for human samples. These synthetic populations require validation against real-world data, so researchers often address them using ad hoc comparisons with human surveys. Inspired by the intention-behaviour gap in behavioural science, we argue that these validations test the wrong thing for most applied cases where decision makers commission synthetic research to anticipate consequential behaviour. To address this problem, we propose a validation framework with two requirements. First, every validity claim must state its level of correspondence with human data: does the sample predict what the represented people do, which of four diagnostics (location, dispersion, response process and structure) does the validation address, and does the validation compare against experimental effects? Second, researchers must report validity claims for subgroups, since these groups are often the most affected by consequential decisions and aggregate accuracy hides their misrepresentation. Our validation framework operationalises three justice dimensions (distributional, procedural, and recognition) as measurable quantities and treats within-persona counterfactual experiments as a design that itself requires validation. We then apply the framework to electric vehicle charging tariffs, before closing with a reporting checklist that researchers can use to make convincing validity claims.

Florian Kutzner, Celina Kacperski, Laura de Molière +4

decision-context. · Seeburg Castle University, Seekirchen am Wallersee, Austria. · Artificial Societies Ltd., London, United Kingdom. +1

Algorithmic Fairness Large Language Model-Based Social Simulation Synthetic Data Evaluation

Sep 23, 2026cs.SD

When Entanglement Lower-Bounds Disparity: Auditing and Repairing Demographic Fairness in Audio Understanding Models

Speech technology penalizes some voices: recognition errs nearly twice as often for Black speakers, and accuracy declines for second-language accents and older speakers. We introduce TRIAD, an audit grid crossing 120 texts, 24 rendered demographic voice profiles (gender, age band, accent), and ten expressive styles via controllable text-to-speech, isolating perceived demographic attributes from content and affect. For ten open-weights encoders we define axis-fidelity functionals, principal-angle leakage between axis subspaces, and group-conditional gaps; a proposition proves that average probe disparity grows with the same aggregate voice-semantic leakage

Λ

we measure, and a corollary shows that peak leakage forces worst-case disparity inside an active region. The measured mean-square probe disparity tracks

Λ

(Pearson r = 0.93), and a black-box protocol exposes the same signature in two closed-source models. ORCA, an adapter combining axis-specific contrastive heads, an orthogonality penalty, and group-balanced sampling, cuts leakage 72% and roughly halves the gaps.

Kian Shamsaie, Iman Modarressi

People Make Things

Disentangled Representation Learning Audio Representation Learning Algorithmic Fairness Audio Understanding Demographic Bias in ASR

Sep 23, 2026cs.SE

FairTest: Search-Based Fairness Testing for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning Systems

Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) trains a team of agents that share one environment and learn their policies together. Training maximizes the team return, and a high return does not imply that the rewards are shared fairly among the agents in every episode. Testing is an established way to discover the failures of deep reinforcement learning, yet few methods address the fairness of MARL. In this work, we propose FairTest, a search-based testing approach that seeks the unfair executions of a MARL policy. The design combines search guidance with test prioritization. The guidance scores each candidate with three fitness functions. One measures the fairness of the runs already performed, another predicts the fairness from abstract states and fairness features, and the third reads the decision uncertainty from the policy. Crossover and mutation derive further candidates from the observed executions. The prioritization ranks the candidates by the predicted fairness and the decision uncertainty, so that the runs reach the candidates where failures are expected. FairTest is evaluated on three environments and two MARL algorithms, and four baselines are given the same budget. It detects the most fairness failures compared to three baselines with statistical significance and large effect sizes. The failure count exceeds that of the strongest baseline by 221% on average and coverage improves by an average of 23%.

Xiaotong Wang, Xuan Xie

School of Computer Science and Engineering, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macao SAR, China

Automated Software Testing Algorithmic Fairness Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning

Sep 22, 2026cs.LG

When Post-Processing Fairness Constraints Help and When They Harm: Evidence from Eight Cross-Domain Evaluations

Fairness audits in production ML typically occur once, at deployment, on a single domain. Both fail in practice: fairness can shift after retraining or a changing user base, and interventions validated on one dataset are rarely tested across the heterogeneous domains an organization deploys. We present FAPE (Fairness Auditing for Production Environments), a four-stage framework evaluating a single post-processing intervention, Fairlearn's ThresholdOptimizer, across eight domain evaluations: criminal justice, income prediction, legal admissions, credit lending, agricultural lending, a multi-domain benchmark corpus, healthcare, and education. Each is scored on demographic parity and equalized odds difference, plus disparate impact ratio and accuracy cost where computable. Intervention effectiveness tracks baseline disparity magnitude: across model-domain pairs the constraint improved disparity in 9 of 14 high-disparity cases and worsened it in 3 of 4 near-fair ones. Each of the five high-disparity exceptions reverses under one of two measurement checks, a minimum group size or thresholds fit on held-out data. A CUSUM monitor started at deployment, tested on a simulated shift, separates constrained models that never met a 0.1 parity convention from those that met it and later regressed. A single deployment-time audit is therefore an unreliable guide, which argues for baseline-disparity screening and continuous monitoring

Nithin Raghava Ramachandra Narla

Independent Researcher, Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Algorithmic Auditing Algorithmic Fairness Group Fairness

Sep 22, 2026cs.LG

FairMean: Promoting Fairness in Distributed Learning under Label Poisoning Attacks

Fairness-aware distributed learning prioritizes clients with large losses to reduce performance disparities, but label poisoning can create large losses, thereby inducing a fairness--robustness conflict. We propose FairMean to manage this conflict. FairMean weights client gradients using a bounded, nondecreasing function of local loss. The increasing weights prioritize high-loss clients to promote fairness, while the upper bound prevents excessive loss-induced amplification of poisoned-client gradients. In the absence of label poisoning, we show that minimizing the FairMean objective is more conducive to solution fairness than minimizing the standard average-loss objective. Under label poisoning, we establish an average-stationarity bound whose attack-dependent term is proportional to the square of the poisoned-client fraction. Experiments show that FairMean promotes fairness by reducing accuracy variance while improving worst-client accuracy.

Huigan Zheng, Jiaojiao Zhang, Yongxiang Liu

Sun Yat-Sen University · Pengcheng Laboratory · Great Bay University

Algorithmic Fairness Adaptive Loss Weighting Distributed Training Data Poisoning Attacks

Sep 21, 2026cs.AI

Queer inclusion in speech datasets: An audit and taxonomy of practical tensions

In this paper, we examine speech datasets for their inclusion of LGBTQIA+, or queer, voices and provide a taxonomy of tensions to better understand why there is a lack of such voices in current speech technology datasets. Through an audit of six diverse speech datasets, we find that measurable queer representation is low (0-1.4% of speakers) - insufficient for robust disparity measurement. We take this community as a case study to consider what challenges and tensions are associated with collecting speech data from marginalized communities. For comparison, we audit an additional two datasets from the speech sciences that were created by, for, and with the queer community. We note that many customs in speech dataset collection efforts in AI and speech technology research may conflict with values emphasized in participatory approaches with marginalized communities, and provide a taxonomy describing these tensions.

Brooklyn Sheppard, Anaelia Ovalle, Adina Williams +1

University of Calgary · Meta FAIR

Algorithmic Fairness

Sep 21, 2026stat.ML

Identifying Representational Biases in Datasets Using PCA: A Max-Disparity Partition Framework

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) minimises aggregate reconstruction error, which can inadvertently represent majority subgroups with substantially higher fidelity than minority subgroups. Fairness-aware extensions of PCA correct this disparity but require group labels as input. We address the logically prior question: given only a data matrix, which binary partition of the data suffers the greatest representational disparity under a shared PCA projection? We formalise this as the max-disparity partition problem and propose a greedy local-search algorithm, grounded in the Fiduccia-Mattheyses bipartitioning framework, that discovers the disparity-maximising partition without any predefined group labels. Two benchmark algorithms, a fixed-projection sorting baseline and a simulated-annealing variant, confirm that the greedy solution is empirically near-optimal. Having identified the partition, we attribute the disparity to specific features via PCA loading scores and association rule mining, enabling a practitioner to assess whether the disadvantaged group corresponds to a human-meaningful minority. On the Predict Students' Dropout and Academic Success dataset, representational disparity is driven predominantly by institutional and programmatic proxies for socioeconomic disadvantage, with gender emerging as a secondary but consistent contributor within the disadvantaged group. The discovered partition is then passed directly to Fair PCA, completing a detect-explain-mitigate pipeline.

Arjun KM, Shashi Jain

Department of Management Studies Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore

Principal Component Analysis Algorithmic Fairness Algorithmic Bias Group Fairness Inverse Dimensionality Reduction Dimensionality Reduction

Sep 21, 2026cs.LG

Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Childhood Stunting in Bangladesh: Fairness and Temporal Robustness Assessment

Childhood stunting remains a major public health concern in Bangladesh and reflects long-term growth failure influenced by child, maternal, household, socioeconomic, and health-service factors. This study used nationally representative Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey data from 2007 to 2022 to develop machine learning models for population-level prediction of childhood stunting and to assess temporal robustness and subgroup fairness. Children aged 0-59 months with complete anthropometric and predictor data were included. Data from the 2007, 2011, and 2014 survey rounds were used for model development, while the 2018 and 2022 rounds were retained as temporal test datasets. Twelve feature-selection approaches were assessed, and the KNN permutation importance-selected predictor set was used for final model evaluation. Eleven machine learning models were evaluated: ten conventional algorithms and one pretrained tabular foundation model, TabPFN. Performance was assessed using balanced accuracy, AUROC, F1-score, Brier score, and expected calibration error. Subgroup fairness was examined by child sex, place of residence, and socioeconomic status. The final analytic sample included 18,844 children, of whom 35.05% were stunted. In the development hold-out test dataset, TabPFN showed the highest observed balanced accuracy overall at 67.58%, while AdaBoost showed the highest observed balanced accuracy among conventional models at 67.51%. In temporal testing, the highest observed balanced accuracy was found for Gradient Boosting in BDHS 2018 and XGBoost in BDHS 2022. Model performance varied across survey rounds and subgroups, highlighting the importance of temporal validation, subgroup fairness assessment, and transparent interpretation in public health prediction modeling.

Md Ahshanul Haque, Muhammad Ashad Kabir

School of Computing, Mathematics and Engineering, Charles Sturt University, NSW, Australia

Healthcare Algorithmic Fairness Tabular ML

Sep 16, 2026cs.CY

The AR Fairness Metamodel: A Structured Framework for Fairness Measures

This paper presents the AR fairness metamodel, a framework designed to represent, analyze, and compare different fairness scenarios. The metamodel considers key elements, such as agents, resources, and their attributes, and enables the systematic definition and comparison of various fairness measures. We provide examples involving both discrete and continuous measures, including equality, equity, group fairness, individual fairness, the Gini index, the Theil index, Jain's fairness index, and a detailed fairness measure for Australia's Child Care Subsidy. We also explore relationships among group fairness, individual fairness, and envy-freeness, supported by formal proofs. At the conceptual modeling level, our approach builds on the Tiles framework, which offers modular components that can be connected to capture diverse fairness definitions. The goal is to make AR-based fairness definitions practical and adaptable across contexts, providing a clear way to define, compare, and evaluate them. An implementation of the Tiles framework is available as an open-source tool, and can support fairness modeling and evaluation across a wide range of applications.

Julian Alfredo Mendez, Timotheus Kampik

Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden

Fair Resource Allocation Algorithmic Fairness Group Fairness

Sep 15, 2026cs.AI

FairCompressAgent: An Agentic Framework for Fairness-Aware Model Compression for FPGA Deployment

Fairness-aware model compression requires selecting methods and configurations that balance accuracy, fairness, and deployment cost. These decisions become more difficult when compression methods are composed or the user's requirements change. In this paper, we propose FairCompressAgent (FCA), an agentic framework that integrates fairness-aware pruning, incremental quantization, and sparse low-rank factorization through a common operator interface. A language-model planner uses model profiles and measured outcomes to select compression configurations, while an execution layer performs compression, fine-tuning, evaluation, and constraint-based selection. FCA also supports requirement updates and reports the remaining violation when a request cannot be satisfied. Experiments on Fitzpatrick-17k with VGG-11 compare four search methods over 40 measured configurations. Under the accuracy-constrained request, FCA selects a compressed model with 59.54% less inference tensor storage, while validation average precision increases from 0.5141 to 0.5233 and equalized opportunity (EOpp) decreases from 0.2251 to 0.2168. It reaches the same final selection as one-shot planning with 7.33 versus 12 candidate evaluations on average, under their respective stopping policies. Repeated fine-tuning, held-out testing, and online requirement updates characterize the stability and interactive use of this compression workflow. The results demonstrate how measured feedback and explicit constraints support the selection and interactive refinement of fairness-aware compression configurations.

Yuanbo Guo, Yiyu Shi

Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, USA

Model Compression Algorithmic Fairness

Sep 14, 2026cs.SE

FairLint-DL: An IDE-Native Tool for Fairness Debugging of Deep Learning Software

Existing fairness analysis tools predominantly operate as post-training evaluation frameworks, requiring practitioners to complete the full model development lifecycle before assessing bias. We present FairLint-DL, a Visual Studio Code extension that implements a shift-left approach to fairness testing by enabling pre-training, IDE-native bias detection directly on tabular datasets. FairLint-DL trains a configurable deep neural network as a proxy model and applies information-theoretic Quantitative Individual Discrimination (QID) metrics. Grounded in Shannon and min-entropy, QID quantifies the causal influence of protected attributes on predictions. The system implements a two-phase gradient-guided search algorithm for discovering discriminatory instances, a causal debugging pipeline that localizes bias to specific network layers and neurons via sensitivity analysis, and dual explainability engines using SHAP and LIME for feature-level attribution. Evaluation on three tabular benchmarks (Adult Census Income, German Credit, and Bank Marketing) reveals fairness concerns that vary widely across datasets: on Adult, 96.0% of analyzed instances exhibit QID above the 0.1-bit significance threshold, with a mean QID of 0.619 bits and a disparate impact ratio of 0.581, violating the four-fifths legal rule. FairLint-DL produces these results within 12 seconds on cached models, demonstrating the feasibility of integrating fairness analysis into the developer workflow without significant overhead.

Archit Rathod, Saeid Tizpaz-Niari

University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago, USA

Algorithmic Fairness

Sep 14, 2026cs.CV

DenseFace: Bias Mitigation in Face Recognition via Density-Aware Probabilistic Matching

Despite steady progress in face recognition, current face recognition models still suffer from significant demographic biases. While approaches for bias mitigation have been proposed, existing methods often impose constraints on the training procedure and result in the degradation of recognition accuracy. To address this issue, we here introduce a method that reduces racial bias in pre-trained face recognition models without compromising their accuracy. To this end, we model face embeddings of each person by von Mises-Fisher (MF) distribution. We next observe the dependency between demographic attributes and the density of MF distributions, and propose DenseFace, a probabilistic face matching procedure that accounts for differences in MF distributions. Our extensive experiments demonstrate DenseFace to consistently reduce racial bias in strong face recognition models varying in network architectures, training datasets and loss functions. Notably, DenseFace preserves recognition accuracy and requires no retraining of the underlying face recognition model. Our work also investigates previously adopted bias measures and makes suggestions.

Mansur Bultygov, Vadim Seliutin, Dmitry Nekhaev +1

VisionLabs · Amazon Web Services · Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence

Algorithmic Fairness Algorithmic Bias Face Recognition

Sep 9, 2026cs.LG

Evaluating Model Retraining under Drift: Paired Comparisons of Cumulative Subgroup Disparity

Choosing when to retrain a deployed classifier requires assessing subgroup error rates across the sequence of models used, including periods between updates. We compare complete scheduled, loss-triggered, and subgroup-gap-triggered policies with retaining the initial model on the same observations and delayed labels. For true-positive and false-positive rates separately, the outcome is the paired difference in absolute subgroup gaps summed over deployment windows. Population evaluation in simulation, action records, and alternative schedules assess how measurement and retraining behaviour affect these comparisons. In a follow-up sample of 400 new trajectories per condition across two simulated drift regimes, all three policies had lower mean cumulative disparity, equivalent to reductions of 0.04 to 0.88 percentage points in the average gap per window. Evaluating the unchanged models against the known generating distributions preserved all mean directions, but finite-window and population comparisons agreed on whether updating increased, reduced or left cumulative disparity unchanged in 69 to 92 percent of trajectories. Under subgroup-specific drift, smaller true-positive-rate gaps accompanied lower sensitivity in both groups. In an exploratory American Community Survey replay, person weighting reversed all three race false-positive-rate mean comparisons without changing predictions or actions; all three weighted intervals included zero. Policy comparisons require group-specific rates, action distributions, and an explicit evaluation population alongside mean disparity. These analyses are non-confirmatory. Shared replay requires policy-independent observations and complete labels after the specified delay.

Aaron Ceross

Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham

Algorithmic Fairness Group Fairness Drifting Models