Fair decision making using privacy-protected data

Satya Kuppam, Ryan McKenna, David Pujol, Michael Hay, Ashwin Machanavajjhala, G. Miklau
{"title":"Fair decision making using privacy-protected data","authors":"Satya Kuppam, Ryan McKenna, David Pujol, Michael Hay, Ashwin Machanavajjhala, G. Miklau","doi":"10.1145/3351095.3372872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Data collected about individuals is regularly used to make decisions that impact those same individuals. We consider settings where sensitive personal data is used to decide who will receive resources or benefits. While it is well known that there is a trade-off between protecting privacy and the accuracy of decisions, we initiate a first-of-its-kind study into the impact of formally private mechanisms (based on differential privacy) on fair and equitable decision-making. We empirically investigate novel tradeoffs on two real-world decisions made using U.S. Census data (allocation of federal funds and assignment of voting rights benefits) as well as a classic apportionment problem. Our results show that if decisions are made using an ∈-differentially private version of the data, under strict privacy constraints (smaller ∈), the noise added to achieve privacy may disproportionately impact some groups over others. We propose novel measures of fairness in the context of randomized differentially private algorithms and identify a range of causes of outcome disparities. We also explore improved algorithms to remedy the unfairness observed.","PeriodicalId":377829,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"69","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372872","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 69

Abstract

Data collected about individuals is regularly used to make decisions that impact those same individuals. We consider settings where sensitive personal data is used to decide who will receive resources or benefits. While it is well known that there is a trade-off between protecting privacy and the accuracy of decisions, we initiate a first-of-its-kind study into the impact of formally private mechanisms (based on differential privacy) on fair and equitable decision-making. We empirically investigate novel tradeoffs on two real-world decisions made using U.S. Census data (allocation of federal funds and assignment of voting rights benefits) as well as a classic apportionment problem. Our results show that if decisions are made using an ∈-differentially private version of the data, under strict privacy constraints (smaller ∈), the noise added to achieve privacy may disproportionately impact some groups over others. We propose novel measures of fairness in the context of randomized differentially private algorithms and identify a range of causes of outcome disparities. We also explore improved algorithms to remedy the unfairness observed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用受隐私保护的数据进行公平决策
收集的个人数据通常用于做出影响这些人的决策。我们考虑使用敏感个人数据的设置来决定谁将获得资源或福利。虽然众所周知,在保护隐私和决策的准确性之间存在权衡,但我们首次发起了一项关于正式私人机制(基于差异隐私)对公平和公平决策的影响的研究。我们利用美国人口普查数据(联邦资金的分配和投票权福利的分配)以及一个经典的分配问题,对两个现实世界的决策进行了实证研究。我们的结果表明,如果在严格的隐私约束(较小的∈)下,使用数据的差异私有版本做出决策,那么为实现隐私而添加的噪声可能会不成比例地影响某些群体。我们在随机差异私有算法的背景下提出了新的公平措施,并确定了结果差异的一系列原因。我们还探讨了改进的算法来补救所观察到的不公平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Dirichlet uncertainty wrappers for actionable algorithm accuracy accountability and auditability Algorithmic targeting of social policies: fairness, accuracy, and distributed governance Regulating transparency?: Facebook, Twitter and the German Network Enforcement Act CtrlZ.AI zine fair: critical perspectives Fairness, accountability, transparency in AI at scale: lessons from national programs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1