Group Fairness

Semi-supervised learning (SSL) enables prediction with limited labels, but high-stakes tabular applications (medical, credit, recidivism) require statistical fairness guarantees. We identify a structural conflict in tabular fair SSL through a diagnostic stress test: under confidence-gated pseudo-labeling, moment-matching fairness regularizers can trigger two failure modes -- Masking Collapse (fairness erodes confidence, starving pseudo-labels) and Trivial Saturation (drift to constant predictors). We propose Online Primal-Dual Allocation (OPDA), an online controller that schedules fairness and entropy-based stability penalties using violation, risk, and pseudo-label health signals, avoiding per-dataset selection of a fixed fairness weight within this diagnostic regime. On the evaluated tabular benchmarks (Adult, ACSIncome, COMPAS), OPDA mitigates the degenerate regimes observed under static weighting and simple single-signal adaptive baselines. On Adult and COMPAS, it yields non-degenerate operating points competitive with the empirical static-$λ$ frontier; on ACSIncome, it preserves utility with a wider fairness-utility spread. Relative to OPDA-lite, the full controller mainly shifts the operating point toward higher utility on ACSIncome, while Adult highlights the fairness-utility trade-off between the two variants. These results position OPDA as a calibration-free controller for non-degenerate operating points in tabular fair SSL without per-dataset tuning.

Machine learning (ML) algorithms are increasingly deployed in high-stakes decision-making domains such as loan approvals, hiring, and recidivism predictions. While existing fairness metrics (e.g., statistical parity, equal opportunity) effectively quantify outcome-oriented disparities, they offer limited insight into the procedure or explanation behind biased decisions. To address this gap, we propose Group-level Explanation Stability Disparity (GESD), a \textit{procedural-oriented} fairness metric that measures disparities in the stability, robustness, and sensitivity of model explanations across different subgroups in a protected category. %GESD is explainer-agnostic, model-agnostic, and extends the scope of fairness analyses to the level of explainability. We further integrate GESD into a multi-objective optimization framework that jointly optimizes for utility, outcome-based fairness, and explanation-based fairness called FEU (Fairness--Explainability--Utility). Empirical results on multiple benchmark datasets show that GESD effectively captures group-wise discrepancies in explanation quality, and that FEU improves both utility and fairness over state-of-the-art methods. By bridging outcome-based and explanation-based fairness, GESD offers a comprehensive tool for diagnosing and mitigating bias in predictive modeling. Our code and datasets are available on GitHub {\hyperlink{https://github.com/horlahsunbo/GESD}{https://github.com/horlahsunbo/GESD}}

Conformal prediction is often calibrated with a single pooled threshold, but this can hide cross-group heterogeneity in score distributions and distort group-wise coverage. We study this phenomenon through the population score distributions underlying split conformal calibration. First, we derive a conservation law and lower bound showing that pooled calibration incurs irreducible group-wise coverage distortion at a scale set by cross-group quantile heterogeneity. Second, we demonstrate that the two leading fairness definitions for conformal prediction, Equalized Coverage and Equalized Set Size, are fundamentally in tension. Third, we quantify the cost of moving between policies which treat groups separately or pool them. Experiments on synthetic and real data confirm the same bidirectional trade-off after finite-sample calibration. Our results show that, for the policy families studied here, calibration choice does not remove cross-group heterogeneity; it determines whether the resulting distortion appears in the coverage or size dimension, providing a principled lens for analyzing fairness-oriented calibration choices in practice.

Clustering is an unsupervised machine learning task that consists of identifying groups of similar objects. It has numerous applications and is increasingly used in fairness-sensitive domains where objects represent individuals, such as customers, employees, or students. We address a fair clustering problem in which objects belong to protected groups. The problem consists of partitioning the objects into a predefined number of clusters while attaining a user-defined target level of fairness, meaning that each protected group is sufficiently represented in each cluster. The objective is to minimize the clustering cost, defined as the sum of squared Euclidean distances between the objects and the centers of their clusters. Since clustering cost and fairness are generally in conflict, managing the trade-off between them is essential in practical applications. Existing methods provide limited control over this trade-off and either fail to scale to large datasets or, when they scale, produce low-quality solutions. We propose a general framework for fair clustering that provides precise control over the cost-fairness trade-off and introduce three heuristics based on it. The first heuristic focuses on solution quality and the flexibility to incorporate additional constraints, the second improves scalability while retaining high solution quality, and the third is designed for maximum scalability, producing solutions for instances with millions of objects in seconds. The proposed heuristics outperform existing approaches in comprehensive numerical experiments on benchmark datasets. The source code of our heuristics and instructions for reproducing the experiments are publicly available on GitHub.

Given items of different sizes and a fixed bin capacity, the bin-packing problem is to pack these items into the minimum number of bins such that the sum of the item sizes in each bin does not exceed the capacity. We define a new variant, k-times bin-packing (kBP), in which the goal is to pack the items so that each item appears exactly k times in k different bins. We generalize existing approximation algorithms for bin-packing to solve kBP and analyze their performance ratios. The fair electricity division problem motivates the study of kBP. The goal is to allocate the available supply among households using some fairness criteria, such as the egalitarian principle. We prove that every electricity division problem can be solved by k-times bin-packing for some finite k, which depends only on the number of households. We implement generalizations of the First-Fit and First-Fit Decreasing bin-packing algorithms to solve kBP and apply them to real electricity demand data. We show that our generalizations outperform existing heuristic solutions to the same problem in terms of the egalitarian allocation of connection time. We study another variant of the egalitarian allocation problem, in which the goal is to maximize the minimum number of watts allocated to a household. For this variant, we prove an impossibility result: there does not exist such a k that depends only on the number of agents. This impossibility result motivates us to develop four different heuristic algorithms to solve the egalitarian allocation of watts problem. We evaluate the heuristics by summing the minimum watts allocated to any household in each hour, yielding a fairness metric that reflects the lowest watt allocation across all hours. A higher total minimum of watts indicates a more equitable distribution. Thus, we establish new benchmarks for fair allocation of watts.

AI alignment and participatory design motivate a new democratic design problem: how to collectively choose a decision rule to use repeatedly. We study this problem for linear ranking rules, which repeatedly rank items $x_j$ within batches $X=(x_1,\dots,x_m)\in(\mathbb{R}^d)^m$, where each item's ranking is dictated by its score $\langle θ^*,x_j\rangle$ according to a fixed scoring vector $θ^*$. Given voters' preferred scoring vectors $θ^{(1)},\dots,θ^{(n)}$ and their population fractions $α^{(1)},\dots,α^{(n)}$, we ask how to choose a collective vector $θ^*$ satisfying individual proportionality (IP): every voter type $i$ should agree with the resulting rankings to an $α^{(i)}$-proportional degree, either on average over time (long-run IP) or even within each batch (per-batch IP). The default rule, the arithmetic mean of the $θ^{(i)}$, has been shown to be severely majoritarian; more generally, it is not clear that any fixed linear rule can balance many voters' disparate opinions. Our main result is that, surprisingly, there is a simple rule that does satisfy long-run IP: the angular mean, the spherical analog of the arithmetic mean. We then show that exact per-batch IP is impossible for fixed linear rules, but that the gap between per-batch and long-run IP shrinks quickly with batch size. Experiments on three real-world preference datasets show that all rules perform similarly when voters' preferences are homogeneous, while the angular mean substantially improves proportionality in high-disagreement regimes.

Conformal prediction methods provide statistically rigorous marginal coverage guarantees for machine learning models, but such guarantees fail to account for algorithmic biases, thereby undermining fairness and trust. This paper introduces a fair conformal inference framework for classification tasks. The proposed method constructs prediction sets that guarantee conditional coverage on adaptively identified subgroups, which can be implicitly defined through nonlinear feature combinations. By balancing effectiveness and efficiency in producing compact, informative prediction sets and ensuring adaptive equalized coverage across unfairly treated subgroups, our approach paves a practical pathway toward trustworthy machine learning. Extensive experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the framework.

Many studies have shown automatic speech processing (ASR) systems have unequal performance across speakergroups (SG's). However, the manner in which such studies arrive at this conclusion is inconsistent. To pave the wayfor more reliable results in future studies, we lay out best practices for benchmarking ASR fairness based on literaturefrom machine learning fairness, social sciences, and speech science. We first describe the importance of preciselythe fairness hypothesis being interrogated, and tailoring fairness metrics to apply specifically to said hypothesis.We then examine several benchmarks used to rate ASR systems on fairness and discuss how their results can bemisconstrued without assiduous oversight into the intersections between SG's. We find that evaluating fairnessbased on single heterogeneous SG's, such as they are defined in fairness benchmarks, can lead to misidentifyingwhich SG's are actually being mistreated by ASR systems. We advocate for as fine-grained an analysis as possibleof the intersectionality of as many demographic variables as are available in the metadata of fairness corpora in orderto tease out such spurious correlations

Designing fair algorithmic decision systems requires balancing model performance with fairness toward affected individuals: More fairness might require sacrificing some performance and vice versa, yet the space of possible trade-offs is still poorly understood. We investigate fairness in binary prediction-based decision problems by conceptualizing decision making as a multi-objective optimization problem that simultaneously considers decision-maker utility and group fairness. We investigate the set of Pareto-optimal decision rules for arbitrary utility functions for decision maker, arbitrary population distributions, and a wide range of group fairness metrics. We find that the Pareto frontier consists of deterministic, group-specific threshold rules applied to individuals' success probability. This complements existing optimality theorems from literature which, for specific fairness constraints, posit lower-bound threshold rules only. However we also show that, depending on the used fairness metric, the Pareto frontier may include upper-bound threshold rules, thus preferring individuals with lower success probabilities. We show that the location of the Pareto frontier depends only on population characteristics, utility functions and fairness score, but not on the technical design of the algorithm - our findings hold for pre-, in-, and post-processing approaches alike. Our results generalize existing optimality theorems for fairness-constrained classification and extend them to generalized fairness metrics and fairness principles, and to partial fairness regimes. This paper connects formal fairness research with legal and ethical requirements to search for less discriminatory alternatives, offering a principled foundation for evaluating and comparing algorithmic decision systems.

Medical image segmentation models can perform unevenly across subgroups. Most existing fairness methods focus on improving average subgroup performance, implicitly treating each subgroup as internally homogeneous. However, this can hide difficult cases within a subgroup, where high-loss samples are obscured by the subgroup mean. We call this problem \textbf{intra-group hidden failure}. To solve this, we propose \textbf{DuetFair} mechanism, a dual-axis fairness framework that jointly considers inter-subgroup adaptation and intra-subgroup robustness. Based on DuetFair, we introduce \textbf{FairDRO}, which combines distribution-aware mixture-of-experts (dMoE) with subgroup-conditioned distributionally robust optimization (DRO) loss aggregation. This design allows the model to adapt across subgroups while also reducing hidden failures within each subgroup. We evaluate FairDRO on three medical image segmentation benchmarks with varying degrees of within-group heterogeneity. FairDRO achieves the best equity-scaled performance on Harvard-FairSeg and improves worst-case subgroup performance on HAM10000 under both age- and race-based grouping schemes. On the 3D radiotherapy target cohort, FairDRO further improves worst-group Dice by 3.5 points ($\uparrow 6.0\%$) under the tumor-stage grouping and by 4.1 points ($\uparrow 7.4\%$) under the institution grouping over the strongest baseline.

Many high-stakes decisions in health care, public policy, and clinical development require committing to a single policy that will be applied uniformly across a heterogeneous population. Regulatory and fairness standards sometime requires that the chosen policy performs adequately in every pre-specified subpopulation, not only on average. We formalize this as a Selection of the Best with Fairness Constraints (SBFC) problem, in order to identify the policy with the highest average performance among those policies that meet a minimum per-subpopulation threshold. We establish an instance-specific lower bound on sample complexity of the SBFC problem. We then develop a Track-and-Stop with Constraints on Subpopulation (T-a-S-CS) algorithm that achieves the lower bound asymptotically. We extend the framework to general closed-set and penalty-based fairness specifications with matching guarantees. Numerical experiments and a case study using the International Stroke Trial demonstrate substantial efficiency gains over policy-level allocation baselines.

Fairness impossibility results often look like distinct scalar incompatibility statements. We show that several share one RKHS geometry: fairness criteria are linear constraints on conditional mean embeddings, and unequal base rates make the law of total expectation overdetermine those constraints. This view yields four results. The Kleinberg--Mullainathan--Raghavan dichotomy needs only group-conditional unbiasedness, not full calibration. The \emph{Pokémon theorem} shows that a distinct group pair satisfying any finite collection of linear mean-fairness criteria leaves a residual violation witnessed by the MMD, decaying at the Kolmogorov $m$-width rate under spectral regularity. The same tools prove an impossibility for fair feature learning: parity and class-conditional separation in representation space force class collapse under unequal base rates. The approximate relaxations yield signal and error frontiers, allowing a trade-off between real-world estimators and fairness goals. Experiments on standard fairness benchmarks are consistent with our bounds.

Collaborative machine learning (CML) enables multiple clients to train a global model jointly in a data-distributed setting. To address data privacy and communication efficiency, one-shot CML has been increasingly adopted, where clients communicate with the server only once by sharing synthetic or processed proxy data. This single-round communication, however, eliminates the possibility of iterative correction at the server, making the learning process particularly vulnerable to client unreliability. In this setting, unreliable clients, whether malicious or non-malicious, may provide biased proxy data that favors certain groups, thereby degrading the fairness of the global model and harming minority or unprivileged groups. In this work, we propose a server-side defense framework based on a bilevel optimization formulation. The proposed approach learns client-level weights to mitigate the influence of biased client proxy data while enforcing fairness constraints by using a very small trusted root dataset available at the server. Experimental results on benchmark datasets show that our method improves fairness with little accuracy loss under biased proxy data contributions from unreliable clients. Moreover, the proposed approach remains effective even when unreliable clients make up a majority of the system, consistently outperforming other existing methods.

Algorithmic decision-making in high-stakes settings can have profound impacts on individuals and populations. While much prior work studies fairness in static settings, recent results show that enforcing static fairness constraints may exacerbate long-run disparities. Motivated by this tension, we study a stylized sequential selection problem in which a decision-maker repeatedly selects individuals, affecting both immediate utility and the population distribution over time. We introduce notions of group fairness for both the short and long term and theoretically analyze the trade-off between fairness and utility via the Price of Fairness (PoF). We characterize optimal and fair policies in the short term and show that the PoF can be large even when group distributions are nearly identical. In contrast, we show that long-term disparities can vanish under simple investment policies that achieve a low PoF. We also empirically validate these theoretical observations using both synthetic and real datasets.

Learning from human preference data is becoming a useful tool, from fine-tuning large language models to training reinforcement learning agents. However, in most scenarios, the model is trained on the average preference of all human evaluators, which, under large variations of preferences, can be unfair to minority groups. In this work, we consider fairness in dueling bandits, a standard framework for online learning from preference data. We assume that each user has a (potentially distinct) Condorcet winner, which is an arm preferred to every other arm. Using these user-specific Condorcet winners as reference points, we evaluate and score arms according to their performance relative to the corresponding winner. To promote fairness across heterogeneous users, we adopt the well-established Nash Social Welfare objective, which maximizes the product of user utilities, thereby inherently penalizing inequality and preventing the marginalization of any single user. Within this framework, we construct a hard instance to establish a regret lower bound of $Ω(T^{2/3}\min(K,D)^\frac{1}{3})$ for a time horizon $T$, $K$ arms, and $D$ users, which, to the best of our knowledge, is the first result quantifying the cost of fairness in dueling bandits with heterogeneous preferences. We then present the Fair-Explore-Then-Commit and Fair-$ε$-Greedy algorithms with a Condorcet winner identification phase. We further derive their regret upper bounds that match the lower-bound dependence on $T$ up to logarithmic factors.

Active learning (AL) has emerged as a crucial strategy for reducing the prohibitive costs associated with medical image segmentation. However, standard uncertainty-based AL methods typically focus on maximizing performance metrics, ignoring performance disparities or fairness across groups with sensitive attributes. While fair active learning has been explored in classification tasks, its intersection with medical image segmentation remains unaddressed. In this work, we introduced a fairness-aware active learning framework with a Weighted Entropy selection strategy that modulates uncertainty based on current group-specific performance estimates on the labeled set. To decouple true epistemic uncertainty from anatomical volume variances, we further utilized a masked, scaled entropy restricted to the region of interest. The framework was evaluated on synthetic T1-weighted brain MRIs with controlled left caudate bias in both strong and weak bias settings. A 3D U-Net was trained to segment the left caudate under several AL strategies, starting from both demographically balanced and strongly imbalanced initial labeled sets. Experiments demonstrated that our method markedly reduces performance disparities between groups compared to random sampling and standard uncertainty sampling. By prioritizing poorly segmented subgroups during the AL cycles, our method consistently achieved the highest equity-scaled performance and reduced the disparity metric by 75% (strong bias) and 86% (weak bias) relative to standard entropy at the final budget. Overall, this work is among the first studies on fair AL for medical image segmentation, offering an efficient strategy to train more equitable models in resource-constrained environments.

Dataset Distillation aims to compress a large dataset into a small synthetic one while maintaining predictive performance. We show that as different demographic groups exhibit distinct predictive patterns, the distillation process struggles to simultaneously preserve informative signals for all subgroups, regardless of whether group sizes are mildly or severely imbalanced. Consequently, models trained on distilled data can experience substantial performance drops for certain subgroups, leading to fairness gaps. Crucially, these gaps do not disappear by merely correcting group imbalance, since they stem from fundamental mismatches in subgroup predictive patterns rather than from sample-size disparities alone. We therefore formally analyze the interaction between these two sources of bias and cast the solution as identifying a group-imbalance-agnostic barycenter of the predictive information that induces similar representations across all subgroups. By distilling toward this shared aggregate representation, we show that group fairness concerns can be reduced. Our approach is compatible with existing distillation methods, and empirical results show that it substantially reduces bias introduced by dataset distillation. Code is available at https://github.com/mhmoslemi/COBRA.

Fairness in machine learning remains challenging due to its ethical complexity, the absence of a universal definition, and the need for context-specific bias metrics. Existing methods still struggle with intersectionality, multiclass settings, and limited flexibility and generality. To address these gaps, we introduce MIFair, a unified framework for bias assessment and mitigation based on mutual information. MIFair provides a flexible metric template and an in-processing mitigation method inspired by the Prejudice Remover, defining group fairness as statistical independence between prediction-derived variables and sensitive attributes. We further strengthen its information-theoretic foundation by establishing equivalences with widely used fairness notions such as independence and separation. MIFair naturally supports intersectionality, complex subgroup structures, and multiclass classification and employs regularization-based training to reduce bias according to the selected metric. Its key advantage is its versatility: it consolidates diverse fairness requirements into a single coherent framework, enabling consistent benchmarking and simplifying practical use. Experiments on real-world tabular and image datasets show that MIFair effectively reduces bias, including previously unaddressed multi-attribute scenarios, while maintaining strong predictive performance across the evaluated settings.

The incorporation of fairness into the distribution network (DN) planning and operation has become a key goal of recent studies. The cost of implementing fairness, denominated the price of fairness (PoF), covers the efficiency that is renounced for attaining social cohesion through fair outcomes. Locational disparity makes fairness schemes emerge to level the consumers playing field. However, fairness encompasses a range of notions. From egalitarian to merit-based criteria, various metrics are implemented as a tool for measuring equitable utility distribution. These have different mathematical complexities, from linear to non-linear programming cases, which affect their overall applicability. Hence, this study compiles the overarching fairness notions and metrics, reviewing how these affect stakeholders and the inherent mathematical optimisation in resource allocation problems. The aim is to support consistent and transparent planning and decision-making within DN operations.

Machine learning models for medical image analysis often exhibit subgroup-dependent performance, which impacts how decisions should be allocated between automated systems and human experts under limited resources. Prior work on AI fairness and human-AI cooperation, including learning to defer (L2D) and learning to complement (L2C), typically addresses these problems in isolation. We propose People-Centred Medical Image Analysis (PecMan), a framework for fairness-aware human-AI co-operative classification that jointly models subgroup-dependent reliability, decision allocation, and collaborative prediction. PecMan combines subgroup-specialised predictors with a gating and consolidation mechanism that dynamically assigns cases to automated models, human experts, or their combination, without requiring sensitive attributes at test time. We also introduce the FairHAI benchmark for evaluating trade-offs between predictive accuracy, subgroup equity, and human involvement. In addition, we provide a theoretical analysis of multi-agent gating via selection regret and characterise fairness-coverage trade-offs under input-dependent allocation. Experiments across multiple medical imaging datasets demonstrate that PecMan achieves consistently improved trade-offs compared to methods that address fairness or human-AI cooperation separately.

The evaluation of machine learning models typically relies mainly on performance metrics based on loss functions, which risk to overlook changes in performance in relevant subgroups. Auditing tools such as SliceFinder and SliceLine were proposed to detect such groups, but usually have conceptual disadvantages, such as the inability to directly address continuous covariates. In this paper, we introduce FairTree, a novel algorithm adapted from psychometric invariance testing. Unlike SliceFinder and related algorithms, FairTree directly handles continuous, categorical, and ordinal features without discretization. It further decomposes performance disparities into systematic bias and variance, allowing a categorization of changes in algorithm performance. We propose and evaluate two variations of the algorithm: a permutation-based approach, which is conceptually closer to SliceFinder, and a fluctuation test. Through simulation studies that include a direct comparison with SliceLine, we demonstrate that both approaches have a satisfactory rate of false-positive results, but that the fluctuation approach has relatively higher power. We further illustrate the method on the UCI Adult Census dataset. The proposed algorithms provide a flexible framework for the statistical evaluation of the performance and aspects of fairness of machine learning models in a wide range of applications even in relatively small data.

Predictive policing systems that allocate patrol resources based solely on predicted crime risk can unintentionally amplify racial disparities through feedback driven data bias. We present FASE, a Fairness Aware Spatiotemporal Event Graph framework, which integrates spatiotemporal crime prediction with fairness constrained patrol allocation and a closed loop deployment feedback simulator. We model Baltimore as a graph of 25 ZIP Code Tabulation Areas and use 139,982 Part 1 crime incidents from 2017 to 2019 at hourly resolution, producing a sparse feature tensor. The prediction module combines a spatiotemporal graph neural network with a multivariate Hawkes process to capture spatial dependencies and self exciting temporal dynamics. Outputs are modeled using a Zero Inflated Negative Binomial distribution, suitable for overdispersed and zero heavy crime counts. The model achieves a validation loss of 0.4800 and a test loss of 0.4857. Patrol allocation is formulated as a fairness constrained linear optimization problem that maximizes risk weighted coverage while enforcing a Demographic Impact Ratio constraint with deviation bounded by 0.05. Across six simulated deployment cycles, fairness remains within 0.9928 to 1.0262, and coverage ranges from 0.876 to 0.936. However, a persistent detection rate gap of approximately 3.5 percentage points remains between minority and non minority areas. This result shows that allocation level fairness constraints alone do not eliminate feedback induced bias in retraining data, highlighting the need for fairness interventions across the full pipeline.

Probabilistic Synchronous Parallel (PSP) is a technique in distributed learning systems to reduce synchronization bottlenecks by sampling a subset of participating nodes per round. In Federated Learning (FL), where edge devices are often unreliable due to factors including mobility, power constraints, and user activity, PSP helps improve system throughput. However, PSP has a key limitation: it assumes device behavior is static and different devices are independent. This can lead to unfair distributed synchronization, due to highly available nodes dominating training while those that are often unavailable rarely participate and so their data may be missed. If both data distribution and node availability are simultaneously correlated with the device, then both PSP and standard FL algorithms will suffer from persistent under-representation of certain classes or groups resulting in inefficient or ineffective learning of certain features. We introduce Availability-Weighted PSP (AW-PSP), an extension to PSP that addresses the issue of co-correlation of unfair sampling and data availability by dynamically adjusting node sampling probabilities using real-time availability predictions, historical behavior, and failure correlation metrics. A Markov-based availability predictor distinguishes transient \emph{vs} chronic failures, while a Distributed Hash Table (DHT) layer decentralizes metadata, including latency, freshness, and utility scores. We implement AW-PSP and trace-driven evaluation shows that it improves robustness to both independent and correlated failures, increases label coverage, and reduces fairness variance compared to standard PSP. AW-PSP thus provides an availability-aware, and fairness-conscious node sampling protocol for FL deployments that will scale to large numbers of nodes even in heterogeneous and failure-prone environments.

We study discrete k-clustering problems in general metric spaces that are constrained by a combination of two different fairness conditions within the demographic fairness model. Given a metric space (P,d), where every point in P is equipped with a protected attribute, and a number k, the goal is to partition P into k clusters with a designated center each, such that a center-based objective function is minimized and the attributes are fairly distributed with respect to the following two fairness concepts: 1) group fairness: We aim for clusters with balanced numbers of attributes by specifying lower and upper bounds for the desired attribute proportions. 2) diverse center selection: Clusters have natural representatives, i.e., their centers. We ask for a balanced set of representatives by specifying the desired number of centers to choose from each attribute. Dickerson, Esmaeili, Morgenstern and Zhang (2023) denote the combination of these two constraints as doubly constrained fair clustering. They present algorithms whose guarantees depend on the best known approximation factors for either of these problems. Currently, this implies an 8-approximation with a small additive violation on the group fairness constraint. For k-center, we improve this approximation factor to 4 with a small additive violation. This guarantee also depends on the currently best algorithm for DS-fair k-center given by Jones, Nguyen and Nguyen (2020). For k-median and k-means, we propose the first constant-factor approximation algorithms. Our algorithms transform a solution that satisfies diverse center selection into a doubly constrained fair clustering using an LP-based approach. Furthermore, our results are generalizable to other center-selection constraints, such as matroid k-clustering and knapsack constraints.

The evaluation of fairness in machine learning systems has become a central concern in high-stakes applications, including biometric recognition, healthcare decision-making, and automated risk assessment. Existing approaches typically rely on a small number of fairness metrics to assess model behaviour across group partitions, implicitly assuming that these metrics provide consistent and reliable conclusions. However, different fairness metrics capture distinct statistical properties of model performance and may therefore produce conflicting assessments when applied to the same system. In this work, we investigate the consistency of fairness evaluation by conducting a systematic multi-metric analysis of demographic bias in machine learning models. Using face recognition as a controlled experimental setting, we evaluate model performance across multiple group partitions under a range of commonly used fairness metrics, including error-rate disparities and performance-based measures. Our results demonstrate that fairness assessments can vary significantly depending on the choice of metrics, leading to contradictory conclusions regarding model bias. To quantify this phenomenon, we introduce the Fairness Disagreement Index (FDI), a measure designed to capture the degree of inconsistency across fairness metrics. We further show that disagreement remains high across thresholds and model configurations. These findings highlight a critical limitation in current fairness evaluation practices and suggest that single-metric reporting is insufficient for reliable bias assessment.

PageRank (PR) is a fundamental algorithm in graph machine learning tasks. Owing to the increasing importance of algorithmic fairness, we consider the problem of computing PR vectors subject to various group-fairness criteria based on sensitive attributes of the vertices. At present, principled algorithms for this problem are lacking - some cannot guarantee that a target fairness level is achieved, while others do not feature optimality guarantees. In order to overcome these shortcomings, we put forth a unified in-processing convex optimization framework, termed FairRARI, for tackling different group-fairness criteria in a ``plug and play'' fashion. Leveraging a variational formulation of PR, the framework computes fair PR vectors by solving a strongly convex optimization problem with fairness constraints, thereby ensuring that a target fairness level is achieved. We further introduce three different fairness criteria which can be efficiently tackled using FairRARI to compute fair PR vectors with the same asymptotic time-complexity as the original PR algorithm. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets showcase that FairRARI outperforms existing methods in terms of utility, while achieving the desired fairness levels across multiple vertex groups; thereby highlighting its effectiveness.

As deep learning (DL) techniques become integral to various applications, ensuring model fairness while maintaining high performance has become increasingly critical, particularly in sensitive fields such as medical diagnosis. Although a variety of bias-mitigation methods have been proposed, many rely on computationally expensive debiasing strategies or suffer substantial drops in model accuracy, which limits their practicality in real-world, resource-constrained settings. To address this issue, we propose a fairness-oriented low rank factorization (LRF) framework that leverages singular value decomposition (SVD) to improve DL model fairness. Unlike traditional SVD, which is mainly used for model compression by decomposing and reducing weight matrices, our work shows that SVD can also serve as an effective tool for fairness enhancement. Specifically, we observed that elements in the unitary matrices obtained from SVD contribute unequally to model bias across groups defined by sensitive attributes. Motivated by this observation, we propose a method, named FairLRF, that selectively removes bias-inducing elements from unitary matrices to reduce group disparities, thus enhancing model fairness. Extensive experiments show that our method outperforms conventional LRF methods as well as state-of-the-art fairness-enhancing techniques in terms of improving fairness while maintaining accuracy. Additionally, an ablation study examines how major hyper-parameters may influence the performance of processed models. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work utilizing SVD not primarily for compression but for fairness enhancement of DL classifications.

Balancing resource efficiency and fairness is critical in networked systems that support modern learning applications. We introduce the \emph{Fair Minimum Labeling} (FML) problem: the task of designing a minimum-cost temporal edge activation plan that ensures each group of nodes in a network has sufficient access to a designated target set, according to specified coverage requirements. FML captures key trade-offs in systems where edge activations incur resource costs and equitable access is essential, such as distributed data collection, update dissemination in edge-cloud systems, and fair service restoration in critical infrastructure. We first give a structural characterisation of the single-terminal case, showing that it is equivalent to the rooted Covering Steiner problem. We prove that FML is NP-hard and admits no $((1-ε)\ln |\mathcal{C}|)$-approximation for $|\mathcal{C}|$ groups, already on a star, while for any fixed number of groups it inherits a constant-factor approximation and remains APX-hard. We then present probabilistic approximation algorithms for the two-group, single-terminal case: an algorithm whose tree subroutine is exact, hence optimal on tree-structured networks and $\mathcal{O}(\log |V|)$ in expectation on general graphs, together with a faster bicriteria variant whose coverage violation degrades gracefully with the merge depth of the tree computation. For practical scalability, we additionally introduce a graph-native variant based on a shortest-path-tree reduction. Empirical results show that FML enforces group-level fairness, while the graph-native variant substantially improves scalability and achieves competitive activation cost.

Discretizing raw features into bucketized attribute representations is a popular step before sharing a dataset. It is, however, evident that this step can cause significant bias in data and amplify unfairness in downstream tasks. In this paper, we address this issue by introducing the unbiased binning problem that, given an attribute to bucketize, finds its closest discretization to equal-size binning that satisfies group parity across different buckets. Defining a small set of boundary candidates, we prove that unbiased binning must select its boundaries from this set. We then develop an efficient dynamic programming algorithm on top of the boundary candidates to solve the unbiased binning problem. Finding an unbiased binning may sometimes result in a high price of fairness, or it may not even exist, especially when group values follow different distributions. Considering that a small bias in the group ratios may be tolerable in such settings, we introduce the epsilon-biased binning problem that bounds the group disparities across buckets to a small value epsilon. We first develop a dynamic programming solution, DP, that finds the optimal binning in quadratic time. The DP algorithm, while polynomial, does not scale to very large settings. Therefore, we propose a practically scalable algorithm, based on local search (LS), for epsilon-biased binning. The key component of the LS algorithm is a divide-and-conquer (D&C) algorithm that finds a near-optimal solution for the problem in near-linear time. We prove that D&C finds a valid solution for the problem unless none exists. The LS algorithm then initiates a local search, using the D&C solution as the upper bound, to find the optimal solution.

We study the problem of fair cohort selection under uncertainty, motivated by university admissions where applicant outcomes are only partially observed. We consider both a one-shot setting, where a fixed policy is applied to a population, and a sequential setting, where policies are updated over time using data from previous admission years. We propose a policy optimization framework that combines probabilistic modeling of outcomes with policy gradient methods, supporting both logistic and neural network policies. In the sequential setting, the approach jointly updates the policy and the underlying models to adapt to evolving applicant populations. Experiments on a simulator grounded in real admission data show that adaptive policies substantially outperform static baselines in term of expected utility, especially under higher admission costs. Neural policies consistently achieve higher utility and adapt more effectively than simpler models, while maintaining favorable fairness properties over time. Our results demonstrate the importance of adaptivity and model expressiveness for decision-making under uncertainty.