Algorithmic Fairness
Momentum
29 papers in the last four weeks, up 71% on the four weeks before. 0.3% of all new papers.
Latest papers 275
This paper provides identification results to characterize a fairness-accuracy (FA) frontier, and statistical inference tools to test hypotheses and build a confidence set for the FA-frontier, when outcomes are observed only for selected individuals. When the selection process is unrestricted but loss is measured in specific ways, we provide a characterization of the sharp identification region of the FA-frontier. Under an assumption of unconfoundedness conditional on observables (and unrestricted loss functions), we obtain point identification and propose a debiased machine learning estimator, derive its asymptotic distribution, and show how this can be used to carry out inference for the FA-frontier. In work in progress, we extend the partial identification results to a broader class of loss functions.
α-Fair Insurance Pricing: A Fairness Continuum
Fairness in insurance pricing remains a long-standing and deeply debated puzzle. On one hand, insurers, driven by profitability considerations, set premiums that differentiate across individual risks to achieve actuarial fairness. On the other hand, insurance serves a critical societal function by pooling risks across a population, motivating cross-subsidization among groups to promote solidarity fairness. The tension between these two competing notions of fairness makes insurance pricing inherently complex, particularly in modern settings where granular data allow for increasingly fine risk differentiation and regulators face growing pressure to protect vulnerable groups. To address this challenge, we propose an -\textbf{F}air \textbf{I}ndividual \textbf{S}olvent \textbf{P}remium (-FISP) framework for insurance pricing that explicitly captures the trade-off between actuarial and solidarity fairness while guaranteeing solvency, a fundamental requirement in insurance operations. We formulate the pricing problem as a constrained optimization task, where actuarially fair premiums are adjusted subject to budget constraints on cross-subsidization within each risk class. This formulation naturally yields a family of solutions parameterized by , tracing a continuum between purely actuarial and purely solidarity-based pricing and enabling decision-makers to select an operating point along this fairness spectrum. We derive theoretical guarantees for the proposed framework. Numerical experiments show that -FISP is computationally tractable and aligns well with the U.S. regulatory regimes featuring heterogeneous state-level fairness requirements.
Disparate Impact in Synthetic Data Generation
We revisit the fairness notion of disparate impact for synthetic data generation (SDG), that assesses whether the utility of generated records is the same across sensitive groups. Our approach departs from existing work on fair SDG, that address the problem of correcting for undue biases in the observed distribution, hence redefining SDG as learning a distribution that is not that of the real data. By contrast, non-disparate impact is notably achieved when the synthetic and real distributions are the same. We expose reasons why SDG may fail to reach that solution and discuss why approximation and estimation errors occur and can be disparate across groups. We notably look into the expressive power of SDG methods relative to distribution complexity, sampling errors due to group proportions, and estimation errors induced by differential privacy mechanisms. We illustrate cases of disparate impact on both artificial and real-world data, focusing on SDG methods that rely on probabilistic graphical models. We also introduce a strategy of learning group-wise SDG models, that constitutes a simple baseline for analyzing and in some settings mitigating cases of disparate impact.
-fair heterogeneous agent reinforcement learning
Cooperation in multi-agent systems is typically optimized through utilitarian objectives that maximize overall efficiency but fail to account for reward distribution, often resulting in inequitable "leader-follower" dynamics. While fairness-based approaches encourage pro-social behaviors where every agent benefits from cooperation, many current algorithms - including those utilizing reward shaping - break the stationarity of Markov Games or lack rigorous theoretical guarantees. This creates a critical gap between fair objective methods and theoretically safe learning frameworks. We propose a novel framework that bridges -fairness with Heterogeneous-Agent Trust Region Learning (HATRL), ensuring monotonic improvement and convergence toward Nash Equilibria. Our approach leverages a fair advantage function that dynamically weights agent utilities based on their expected returns, allowing the global objective to transition from purely utilitarian efficiency to -fairness welfare based on the parameter . We introduce two practical algorithms, -fair HATRPO and -fair HAPPO, and demonstrate through experiments in sequential social dilemmas like CleanUp and CommonHarvest that they perform better than HATRL's algorithms from a utilitarian point of view while achieving socially higher outcomes.
Towards Provably Fair Machine Learning: Bayesian Approaches For Consistent and Transparent Predictions
ML classifiers deployed in high-stakes domains produce predictions whose quality varies systematically across subgroups. For granular subgroups defined by intersections of multiple features, predictions are often inconsistent with the observed data: the model's outputs contradict the evidence available for that subgroup. This problem is exacerbated by regularisation, which improves aggregate performance by collapsing small subgroups into larger groups, disproportionately affecting demographic minorities. We define two requirements for consistent prediction: determinism (identical individuals receive identical predictions) and statistical consistency (we cannot reject, at significance level alpha, the hypothesis that the predictions for a subgroup were drawn from the Bayesian optimal target distribution inferred for that subgroup). From these requirements we derive the Fair Bayesian classifier, which enforces both across every group and subgroup simultaneously and abstains whenever no consistent deterministic prediction is possible. On three benchmark datasets (Adult, COMPAS, and Bank Marketing), standard classifiers produce statistically inconsistent predictions for a substantial proportion of subgroups. Our classifier achieves zero consistency error by construction while exceeding baseline accuracy and multicalibration on every dataset tested. Statistical consistency provides a principled foundation for prediction quality with direct implications for algorithmic fairness. Minority demographics are disproportionately concentrated in small subgroups, precisely where frequentist inference is least reliable; addressing this inference problem is therefore a necessary step toward fair ML. By enforcing Bayesian consistency at the finest resolution the data supports, the our classifier demonstrates that exhaustive subgroup fairness with principled abstention is achievable in practice.
Debiasing Without Protected Attributes: Latent Concept Erasure from Textual Profiles
Most fairness research in NLP assumes direct access to protected attributes such as gender, race, or nationality. In practice, however, such information is often unavailable due to privacy constraints, missing metadata, or legal restrictions, even though models may infer it from indirect textual cues. This raises a key question: can debiasing succeed without direct access to sensitive attributes? We propose H-SAL, which performs post-hoc concept and attribute erasure using self-description text as an implicit debiasing signal. To support this setting, we introduce a multi-domain Stack Exchange-based fairness benchmark for helpfulness prediction that includes both explicit and implicit signals, enabling comparison between standard debiasing with protected labels and debiasing without access to sensitive information. Across encoder and decoder-only language models, we find that implicit self-description often matches or outperforms explicit-label-based debiasing. Our results broaden representation-level fairness research and provide a new benchmark for studying debiasing under realistic data constraints.
Towards Fully Automated Exam Grading: Fairness-Aware Recognition of Handwritten Answers with Foundation Models
Correcting handwritten exams by hand is time-consuming and error-prone, particularly for large cohorts, while fully digital exams tend to force a didactic narrowing towards closed question formats. A practical middle ground keeps paper-based, problem-oriented tasks but records the assessment-relevant answers as single capital letters in a table that a machine can read. The open question is whether this reading can be made accurate and, above all, fair enough for unsupervised grading. Earlier automated approaches reached only about 88%--91% recognition -- too low -- and failed on the cases that matter most: answers placed outside the cell, crossed out, or written in cursive. We show that general-purpose vision-language foundation models (VLMs), which interpret the page rather than match pixel templates, close this gap. On a benchmark of 61 anonymised exams (3141 answer positions) the best model reaches 98.4% accuracy, well above the previous baseline. Crucially, we centre the evaluation on fairness: we distinguish false negatives (a correct answer marked wrong, which disadvantages the student) from false positives, and a lightweight prompt that supplies the reference solution as context lowers the false-negative rate to 0.58%. Under an exemplary grading scheme only three of the 61 exams would be graded worse, all caught by a student self-review step. Fully automated, fairness-aware exam grading at scale is therefore defensible; we release the anonymised benchmark to support reproducibility.
Ethical and Technical Limits of Deepfake Speech Datasets
Claims about the robustness and fairness of deepfake speech detectors are only as credible as the datasets used to train and evaluate those systems. We present a dataset-level audit of the deepfake speech landscape. We compile and analyze 39 deepfake speech datasets, examining key attributes including accessibility, documentation, demographic and language coverage, dataset scale, and the underlying bona fide speech sources. Our audit reveals two important takeaways. Firstly, fairness assessment is largely infeasible because most datasets lack demographic metadata, and only a few contain gender or language labels. This prevents any meaningful subgroup analysis and leaves other demographic attributes unaddressed. Secondly, we identify substantial overlap in underlying bona fide source corpora across datasets, which can undermine cross-dataset evaluation and lead to overstated generalization claims.
Is Fairness Truly Fair? Towards Reliable Lipschitz Fairness in Multi-Task Learning via Fixed-\texorpdfstring{}{delta} Alignment
Lipschitz-style individual fairness formalizes the idea that semantically similar examples should receive similar predictions, but its evaluation in multi-task learning (MTL) can be confounded by method-induced representation scales. This paper identifies threshold confounding: when the auditing tolerance is derived from each model's own representation distances, different algorithms are compared under different semantic thresholds. A threshold-drift analysis further shows how Bias rankings can change and identifies sufficient conditions for ranking preservation. We propose \textbf{ReLiF}, a reliability-aware framework that separates evaluation-time fixed- auditing from training-time controlled regularization. ReLiF uses a shared reference tolerance for comparable auditing and a violation-rate feedback controller to keep the Lipschitz surrogate active without letting it dominate stochastic training. This work also develops supporting analysis for threshold drift, reference-tolerance selection, and the relationship between the huberized training surrogate and its unsmoothed positive-margin counterpart. Experiments on clinical time-series benchmarks and NYUv2 (NYU Depth V2) dense prediction show that fixed- auditing exposes utility--fairness trade-offs that method-dependent thresholds can obscure. On NYUv2 with a ResNet50 backbone, ReLiF achieves competitive utility while substantially reducing aligned bias under shared fixed thresholds. On clinical benchmarks, ReLiF yields controlled fairness-regularized trade-offs, while fixed- auditing reveals that task-balancing baselines can sometimes achieve lower bias and that genuine utility--fairness trade-offs persist. These results support fixed- auditing as a semantically consistent protocol for evaluating Lipschitz fairness in MTL.
Trading Utility for Dynamic Fairness in Multiple Resource Division with Sequential Demand
Dynamic multi-resource allocation is a central problem in shared computing environments, where users' demands arrive sequentially and resources must be distributed fairly without knowledge of future demands. Existing methods emphasize fairness guarantees such as Sharing Incentive, Envy Freeness, and Dynamic Pareto Optimality, but often overlook system utility. Moreover, these fairness criteria are mutually incompatible, preventing strict enforcement of them at the same time. We propose a neural allocation mechanism that reconciles fairness with utility through multi-objective optimization during sequential rollout. We first formalize fairness in the dynamic setting via stepwise loss functions for Sharing Incentive, Envy Freeness, and Dynamic Pareto Optimality, enabling differentiable training. Leveraging non-wastefulness, we parameterized the solutions by constraining allocations to the subspace of demand while allowing elastic over-allocation when resources remain available. Empirical results demonstrate that our learned allocator achieves substantially higher utility at comparable levels of fairness, uncovering clear Pareto-frontier-like tradeoffs across metrics.
PAFO: Pareto Fairness Optimization for Personalized Reward Modeling
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on reward models to align their outputs with diverse user preferences. While personalized reward models aim to capture such heterogeneity, they are often trained on imbalanced user preference data and may therefore favor users whose preferences are more common in the training population. In this paper, we identify this failure mode as personalized reward bias, where reward modeling quality varies systematically with preference support rate. We formulate its mitigation as a Pareto fairness problem over group utilities, aiming to improve under-served users without degrading other user groups. To this end, we propose PAFO, a Pareto fairness optimization framework for personalized reward modeling. PAFO first trains group-specialized reward models for majority and minority preference groups, then constructs conditional margin-level supervision to distill their heterogeneous preference boundaries into a single unified model. The resulting model uses group information only during training and requires no explicit group labels at inference time. Experiments on Personal-LLM and DSP show that PAFO improves both minority-group and majority-group accuracy while reducing user-level unfairness across multiple metrics, demonstrating its effectiveness for fairer LLM personalization.
Be Fair! Can Machine Learning Engineering Agents Adhere to Fairness Constraints?
Machine learning engineering (MLE) agents promise to automate end-to-end ML pipeline development from raw data and natural language instructions, potentially making ML accessible to non-technical domain experts. However, in sensitive and regulated domains, this abstraction creates a responsibility gap: end-users may lack visibility into design choices that affect correctness, robustness, fairness, and regulatory compliance. We argue that existing benchmarks are insufficient to assess whether MLE agents can be safely applied in such settings. We propose desiderata for a responsibility-centered evaluation framework and conduct an exploratory study on melanoma classification, focusing on fairness across skin tones as a responsibility constraint. When evaluating two recent MLE agents, we find that agent-generated pipelines show high variance and consistently underperform manually designed baselines in both predictive quality and fairness, despite fairness-oriented prompts. These preliminary results suggest that further research is needed towards redesigning MLE agents to allow humans to guide the search process and reliably assess the compliance and quality of the generated ML pipelines.
UniFair: A unified fair clustering approach based on separation and compactness
Clustering is increasingly used to support high-impact decisions, yet standard objectives such as k-means can produce clusterings that treat demographic groups unequally. Existing fair clustering methods typically optimize a single notion of fairness and often overlook how clustering costs interact with the geometry of the induced decision boundaries. We propose UniFair, a unified framework that jointly optimizes separation fairness and social fairness. Separation fairness encourages protected groups to lie farther from the induced decision boundaries, while social fairness reduces disparities in within-cluster distortion by penalizing group-wise clustering costs. We develop gradient-based optimization procedures for separation-fair and unified k-means objectives, and extend them to deep clustering by enforcing the same criteria in the latent space of an autoencoder. Experiments on tabular and image datasets show that UniFair reduces both boundary-related and cost-based group disparities with only a modest increase in clustering loss.
Toward Calibrated, Fair, and accurate Deepfake Detection
Deepfake detectors show large performance gaps across demographic groups. Existing fairness approaches require demographic labels, retraining, or sacrifice accuracy. We introduce Face-Fairness (FF), a plug-and-play framework for bias mitigation. Our primary contribution, Face-Feature Tuning (FFT), is the first demographic label-free fairness method demonstrated for deepfake detection: a lightweight calibrator that performs a logit remapping conditioned on frozen face embeddings. We complement FFT with two variants: FF-Max, which maximizes worst-group accuracy when demographics are available, and FF-Discover, which does the same with embedding-discovered groups. Across in-domain and cross-dataset test settings, FF consistently reduces FPR/TPR gaps and improves minimum group accuracy while maintaining (often improving) overall accuracy. The approach is detector-agnostic, adds negligible runtime overhead, and requires no access to identity attributes.
Adaptive Calibration for Fair and Performant Facial Recognition
We introduce Adaptive Calibration (AC), a novel calibration strategy for facial recognition that maps cosine similarity between normalized embeddings to well-calibrated probabilities. By incorporating local context into calibration, Adaptive Calibration corrects for a fundamental mismatch in cosine similarity, whereby the same distance can correspond to different match probabilities in different embedding regions. Our approach improves both overall performance and results in a fairer calibration without requiring demographic metadata. Our approach often improves worst-group ranking and probability quality across a variety of pretrained models and standard benchmarks, with gains in low-FPR verification performance depending on the setting. AC provides a practical solution for equitable facial recognition, without requiring demographic group annotations, and while improving overall performance. Our method provides continuous, region-specific calibration, and we examine per-group performance to assess "leveling down" where fairness comes at the cost of degraded performance for some groups.
Detecting and Mitigating Bias by Treating Fairness as a Symmetry Operation
Machine learning systems deployed in high stakes socioeconomic settings routinely display bias. We formalize bias as a symmetry breaking operation: a classifier is fair if its outputs remain invariant under the counterfactual operation of switching a sensitive attribute, with merit features held fixed. We implement loss based regularization as a symmetry restoring mechanism and evaluate the framework on four synthetic datasets with varying levels of noise, correlation, and bias. The framework achieves upwards of 90% violation reduction, with accuracy costs around 5%. This framework does not require causal graph knowledge, is computationally lightweight, and generalizes to any sensitive attribute definable as a bit-flip, making it suitable for contexts where local sources of discrimination remain absent from mainstream benchmarks.
Fairness Definitions and Metrics in Deep Reinforcement Learning for Drug Discovery in Healthcare: A Rapid Evidence Review
Deep reinforcement learning (DRL) is increasingly applied to de novo molecular design, but choices in data, rewards, and evaluation can yield uneven performance across disease areas and chemotypes. Despite this, there is no concise synthesis of how fairness is defined, measured, and tested in DRL-based drug discovery. In this rapid evidence review, we synthesize fairness definitions and metrics for DRL-driven molecule generation in healthcare. We focus on three questions: (i) how dataset composition and split strategies, especially scaffold versus random splits, affect evaluation and distribution shift; (ii) how reward design (e.g., QED, docking, toxicity, synthetic accessibility) can create or mitigate bias, with emphasis on cancer targets; and (iii) which measurable metrics best capture fairness. This includes parity across cancer versus non-cancer indications and across cancer subtypes. It also includes distributional balance in key physicochemical descriptors, scaffold/chemotype diversity, groupwise validity, toxicity, and synthetic accessibility. From 2017 onward, we searched major biomedical, computer science, and engineering literature databases and used arXiv for horizon scanning. Records were screened using PRISMA-style procedures and analyzed via content coding to link reported parity outcomes to dataset and reward choices. Our review provides a concise set of fairness definitions and metrics for DRL molecule generation. It offers practical guidance for reporting distribution parity and outcome parity. It also summarizes how dataset and reward choices relate to observed parity effects and identifies open gaps relevant to trustworthy, cancer-relevant DRL generation.
The Crowded Embedding Space: A Mean-Field Mechanism for Emergent Marginalization in Retrieval-Augmented Agents
Retrieval-augmented generative agents rely on retrieval for grounding, yet are typically evaluated on a query-by-query basis. This isolates interactions that are geometrically coupled in a shared embedding space. For example, we show that the high document density required to serve majority interests (e.g., generic "Crime" movies) can geometrically overcrowd the retrieval neighborhood of a semantically similar minority (e.g., "Film Noir"), effectively expelling minority content from top- results. We introduce a formal framework to analyze how such goal collisions in dense retrieval induce fundamental performance limits and emergent fairness issues inherent to spatial crowding. In our static analysis, we demonstrate that for a fixed embedding space, a phase transition occurs where minority user goals suffer a catastrophic collapse in performance as the density of majority goals increases. We then extend this to a dynamic model and derive a non-linear Fokker-Planck equation that governs the evolution of document embeddings as the agent updates them to maximize retrieval accuracy. Our analysis reveals that this local relevance objective triggers an emergent global mechanism that systematically marginalizes minority interests. We prove that such objectives drive the system to self-organize into a state that exclusively serves majority interests. These results provide a theoretical foundation for understanding a critical grounding failure mode in retrieval-augmented agents.
FairGen: Preference-Aligned Diffusion for Demographically Equitable Medical Image Synthesis
Medical imaging is central to modern diagnostics, and artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly used to support image-based analysis by improving efficiency, accuracy, and access to care. However, inequities in healthcare access and differential disease prevalence create severe demographic imbalances in clinical image data. Such imbalances are compounded by the fact that diseases can manifest with distinct features across demographic groups, rendering certain phenotypic presentations naturally rare. AI models trained on such imbalanced data risk perpetuating diagnostic bias and widening healthcare disparities. Here we introduce FairGen, a fairness-aware diffusion framework that synthesizes demographically balanced medical images while preserving pathology-relevant visual features. By embedding physician-aligned preferences into the generation process, FairGen improves subgroup coverage during synthesis and downstream classification. Applied to dermatology, radiology, and neuroimaging benchmark tasks, FairGen achieves fairness improvements of 95.9% for skin images, 80.0% for chest radiography, and 35.2% for brain MRI, while maintaining competitive diagnostic accuracy relative to models trained on original clinical data. Clinician-facing expert review and external validation on independent cohorts further support that these gains extend beyond standard fidelity metrics and are not confined to the original in-distribution datasets.
Model Multiplicity and Predictive Arbitrariness in Recidivism Risk Assessment
Prediction tasks over individual futures, which are inherently noisy, often admit multiple similarly accurate models. When these models produce different predictions for the same individual, they raise concerns of arbitrariness in decision-making. How severe can this arbitrariness be, in theory and in practice? How can it be resolved to support high-stakes risk assessment? We address these questions through a study of a machine learning-based decision support system for recidivism risk assessment that has been in use for over 15 years. By translating complex legal rules into an algorithm for labeling post release outcomes (recidivist or non-recidivist), we first construct a dataset of thousands of inmate releases. Using this dataset, we learn interpretable models that improve predictive performance, reduce error-rate disparities between groups, and ensure that rehabilitative progress lowers risk scores. Next, we study predictive multiplicity, by first deriving a tight lower bound on the expected predictive agreement of any finite set of models over a dataset, and then by evaluating the extent to which structural diversity (e.g., different model coefficients) within this set translates to predictive multiplicity (i.e., different predictions for the same individual). Our experiments indicate that the existence of many similarly accurate models with comparable error-rate disparities does not necessarily translate into severe predictive multiplicity. Empirically, similarly performant models can exhibit substantially higher predictive agreement than worst-case theoretical guarantees suggest. We find that a simple policy that assigns each inmate the lowest risk among these models is effective for addressing predictive arbitrariness.
TriAlign: Towards Universal Truth Consistency in Personalized LLM Alignment
Personalized large language models adapt responses to users' preferences and social attributes, but can introduce substantial universal truth inconsistencies across social groups, where some groups systematically receive less accurate responses on objective tasks. Existing alignment methods either ignore personalization or mainly focus on subjective preference alignment, largely overlooking fairness and consistency in universal truths. To address this gap, we study Truth-Invariant Alignment (TIA), an alignment problem for personalized LLMs that aims to ensure universal truths remain consistent across social groups while preserving personalization. We propose TriAlign, the first offline multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) framework for TIA, where each social group is modeled as an agent interacting. TriAlign jointly optimizes universal truth accuracy, cross-group truth consistency, and personalization through a fairness-aware objective and an explicit inconsistency penalty. Experiments across diverse benchmarks demonstrate that TriAlign achieves a stronger balance among these three objectives than strong baselines, reducing universal truth disparities across social groups while improving both objective task performance and personalization quality.
Fair Finetuning Mitigates Distribution Inference Attacks
Machine learning models trained on sensitive data can inadvertently leak population-level information about their training distributions -- a threat known as distribution inference attack (DIA). An adversary with black-box access can infer sensitive demographic properties, such as subgroup proportions, without observing any training data directly. While defenses such as differential privacy and property unlearning have been proposed, the link between fairness constraints and distributional leakage remains unexplored. We propose Fair Fine-tuning (FFt): a trained model is fine-tuned on samples from the complementary distribution under an Equalized Odds (EO) constraint. We provide a complete theoretical characterization, proving the tight bound , where quantifies how distinguishable the two training distributions are by their sensitive-attribute composition. We also establish a necessary condition for FFt to reduce adversarial advantage and prove tightness of the bound. We evaluate across six datasets spanning tabular (ACS Income, COMPAS, German Credit), image (UTKFaces), and NLP (Bias in Bios) modalities. Rehearsal-based FFt consistently reduces the adversarial accuracy gap below the detection threshold across all settings; on ACS Income, the gap falls from to under . Our work provides the first formal bound connecting a model's measured EO disparity directly to its adversarial advantage in the DIA game, opening a new avenue for unified fairness-and-privacy defenses.
KG-FairDiff: Knowledge Graph-Guided Prompt Refinement for Demographically Fair Text-to-Image Generation
Text-to-Image (TTI) systems are now everyday infrastructure for journalism, education, advertising, and public communication, and the demographic and cultural stereotypes they inherit from training data (rendering women, people of colour, older adults, and non-Western cultures as under-represented or caricatured) become a population-level harm at deployment scale. Existing mitigations either require costly retraining, infeasible for the closed-source backbones that dominate consumer products, or rely on fixed demographic templates that ignore cultural context. We present KG-FairDiff, a model-agnostic, inference-time framework that formalises fairness-aware prompt refinement as a constrained optimisation problem and operationalises it as a closed-loop pipeline: a knowledge graph of ~1,200 culture- and bias-related triples retrieves structured context, an LLM rewriter proposes refinements, and a validator accepts only prompts that reduce a divergence-based fairness loss while preserving semantic fidelity to the user's original intent. We prove a finite-termination bound for the refinement loop, contribute a mathematically consistent evaluation suite linking Bias-P/Bias-W to divergence from target distributions and ENS to KL divergence, and audit eight widely-deployed backbone generators. KG-FairDiff substantially reduces gender, race, age, and intersectional disparities while preserving prompt semantics, offering a practical, deployment-ready route to more equitable generative AI.
Fairness in two-player zero-sum games with bandit feedback
We study two-player zero-sum games (TPZSGs) with bandit feedback under fairness constraints requiring every action to be played with probability at least . Existing instance-dependent results target Nash equilibria, while fairness generically produces equilibria, a harder learning target. Our key technical tool is a reparametrization: every fair strategy decomposes as with , and substituting into the payoff form yields for a fair payoff matrix , where is the column-mean vector. The fair game on is then equivalent to a standard zero-sum game on , so equilibrium existence, KKT structure, and LP basis stability reduce to classical results applied to . We derive the fair minimax value, fair Nash equilibrium, fair regret, and a clean dual representation showing the price of fairness is at most and vanishes whenever the unconstrained equilibrium already has full support. Our main result is an regret bound for an Explore-Then-Commit algorithm, , applicable to general mixed fair equilibria, together with a discussion of why naive action elimination does not readily improve it. When the fair equilibrium has a single dominant action, equivalently when is a vertex of , the bound sharpens to instance-dependent , where is the LP-margin gap.
Silent Failures in Federated Personalization of Foundation Models
Foundation models are increasingly personalized on decentralized private data through federated learning and are now deployed at scale under growing regulatory requirements for post-market monitoring. We argue that this convergence creates a distinct and under-recognized class of trustworthiness failures, which we term "Silent Failures." These include amplified bias, fairness collapse, and alignment erosion that may remain difficult to detect because federated learning's privacy constraints limit visibility into model behavior. A landscape analysis of existing benchmarks reveals a structural divide. Federated benchmarks evaluate system performance but provide limited insight into model behavior, whereas centralized trustworthiness benchmarks assess behavior but require model access incompatible with federated privacy. We introduce a taxonomy of six silent failure modes arising from the interaction of foundation model personalization, dataset shift, and core federated constraints. Our analysis shows that privacy-preserving training alone is insufficient for trustworthy deployment. We conclude with a research agenda for privacy-preserving behavioral evaluation and propose that silent failures become a standard diagnostic category for trustworthy federated artificial intelligence.
Beyond Independent Manipulation: Individual Fairness-aware Strategic Classification with Peer Imitation
Strategic classification (SC) investigates scenarios where agents manipulate their features to obtain favorable decisions from predictive models. Existing fairness-aware SC approaches primarily focus on group fairness and typically assume that agents respond independently. However, when individual fairness is required, ensuring similar individuals receive similar outcomes, agents' manipulation becomes interdependent: an agent's preferred manipulation depends on the neighborhoods' outcomes. This induces a mismatch between classical SC formulations and fairness-aware decision settings, where independent models no longer accurately characterize strategic manipulations. To address this issue, we introduce individual fairness-aware strategic classification (IFSC), a framework that models peer-driven manipulation arising from individual fairness, where agents imitate nearby positively decided peers to obtain favorable outcomes. IFSC characterizes strategic manipulation as similarity-based imitation toward visible accepted peers and learns classifiers under the resulting post-manipulation distributions. To account for uncertainty in peer observability, IFSC employs a robust learning process that introduces stochastic perturbations during manipulation simulation. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that IFSC improves individual-fairness consistency and mitigates imitation-induced distortions.
Partial Fairness Awareness: Belief-Guided Strategic Mechanism for Strategic Agents
Strategic machine learning investigates scenarios where agents manipulate their features to receive favorable decisions from predictive models. To address fairness concerns intrinsic to strategic classification, recent work has introduced group-specific fairness constraints. However, current fairness-aware approaches face a fundamental dilemma in the issue of fairness exposure: making these constraints public enables strategic manipulation and can lead to fairness reversal, while keeping them hidden may reduce social welfare and discourage genuine improvement. To fill this gap, we subsequently propose the problem of partial fairness awareness (PFA), as our theoretical analysis informs that such a dilemma can be mitigated by releasing the candidate set of fairness constraints and concealing the grounding constraint. To be specific, we introduce a belief-guided strategic mechanism, wherein agents iteratively interact with the decision system and maintain a belief distribution over the candidate set of fairness constraints. This belief-guided process enables agents, through iterative interaction and feedback, to update their belief distribution over the candidate set, thereby gradually aligning their belief with the grounding fairness constraint employed by the system. Extensive experiments on real-world and synthetic datasets demonstrate that PFA achieves lower group fairness gaps, higher acceptance of truly qualified individuals, and more stable outcomes compared to fully public or private fairness regimes.
COPF: An Online Framework for Deployment-Stable Counterfactual Fairness in Evolving Graphs
Online link recommendation on evolving graphs is performative: by choosing which candidate links to show users, the system changes which links form and what feedback it later observes. Consequently, fairness estimates from logged outcomes can be misleading and may drift after deployment when the recommendation policy is updated. We introduce COPF (Counterfactual Online Performative Fairness), a decision-layer framework for deployment-stable fairness monitoring and control in online link recommendation. COPF (i) defines group-level opportunity gaps over exposure (shown vs. not shown) counterfactuals, (ii) makes them estimable by explicit exploration and by logging the probability (propensity) that each candidate is shown, and (iii) audits and controls fairness using residual outcome indistinguishability (OI) over a configurable auditor family with graph-aware doubly robust (GA-DR) estimators. We provide a noisy transfer theorem showing that Residual-OI on estimated GA-DR residuals implies bounds on exposure-counterfactual group gaps under temporal mixing and bounded local interference, and we instantiate an online multicalibration auditor together with a primal-dual controller. Experiments on two TGB streams and a controlled synthetic bipartite stream show that COPF reduces worst-case spikes in exposure-counterfactual group disparities with modest impact on ranking utility. Our code is available at https://github.com/lsnnnnnnnn/COPF.
Demystifying the Optimal Fair Classifier in Multi-Class Classification
Ensuring fair and equitable treatment across diverse groups, particularly in multi-class classification tasks, poses a significant challenge due to the persistent biases inherent in machine learning models. Most existing bias mitigation techniques are tailored to binary settings, and the presence of multi-dimensional outputs and complex fairness mechanisms makes their extension to multi-class scenarios neither straightforward nor effective. In this paper, we investigate two fundamental, unresolved challenges in fair classification: (i) characterizing the optimal accuracy-fairness frontier in multi-class settings, and (ii) designing practical algorithms that attain this optimum in different training phases. To tackle these challenges, we first specify an analytically tractable probabilistic formulation of the optimal classifier under fairness constraints. Building upon this, we propose two attribute-blind algorithms to enforce fairness requirements in practice: an in-processing approach for fairness intervention during training via the reduction approach, and a post-processing approach for fine-tuning output probabilities with plug-in estimation. Theoretical analysis reveals that both methods converge to the optimal accuracy-fairness Pareto frontier. Experiments conducted on multiple datasets demonstrate the superior performance of our methods in balancing accuracy and fairness.
Shortcuts in the Tail: Debiasing via Post-Hoc Spectral Compression of Fine-Tuning Updates
Fine-tuning often introduces spurious correlations alongside task knowledge, causing systematic failures on underrepresented groups. Existing mitigations require retraining, group labels, or curated counterfactual data. We show a simple post-hoc intervention reduces shortcut reliance without any of these: truncating the tail of the SVD of reduces the spurious-group gap while preserving task accuracy. Across three instruction-tuned models (B--B) and four classification benchmarks, top- truncation reduces the gap on every cell at pp accuracy loss, by up to on CivilComments. We propose this works because the shortcut response sits in the tail of the singular ordering of , a claim about how truncation behaves rather than about the raw singular values, which are broadly distributed and look the same across all four datasets. A controlled boundary case in which fine-tuning has only a shortcut to learn shows the predicted FT-to-base collapse, and bottom-/random- and matched-rank LoRA controls rule out generic low-rank approximation and rank-constrained training as the explanation. We read this as preliminary evidence that the singular basis of is a useful coordinate system for studying what fine-tuning has learned.