Biased data can lead to unfair machine learning models, highlighting the importance of embedding fairness at the beginning of data analysis, particularly during dataset curation and labeling. In response, we propose Falcon, a scalable fair active learning framework. Falcon adopts a data-centric approach that improves machine learning model fairness via strategic sample selection. Given a user-specified group fairness measure, Falcon identifies samples from "target groups" (e.g., (attribute=female, label=positive)) that are the most informative for improving fairness. However, a challenge arises since these target groups are defined using ground truth labels that are not available during sample selection. To handle this, we propose a novel trial-and-error method, where we postpone using a sample if the predicted label is different from the expected one and falls outside the target group. We also observe the trade-off that selecting more informative samples results in higher likelihood of postponing due to undesired label prediction, and the optimal balance varies per dataset. We capture the trade-off between informativeness and postpone rate as policies and propose to automatically select the best policy using adversarial multi-armed bandit methods, given their computational efficiency and theoretical guarantees. Experiments show that Falcon significantly outperforms existing fair active learning approaches in terms of fairness and accuracy and is more efficient. In particular, only Falcon supports a proper trade-off between accuracy and fairness where its maximum fairness score is 1.8--4.5x higher than the second-best results.

As machine learning becomes prevalent, mitigating any unfairness present in the training data becomes critical. Among the various notions of fairness, this paper focuses on the well-known individual fairness, which states that similar individuals should be treated similarly. While individual fairness can be improved when training a model (in-processing), we contend that fixing the data before model training (pre-processing) is a more fundamental solution. In particular, we show that label flipping is an effective pre-processing technique for improving individual fairness. Our system iFlipper solves the optimization problem of minimally flipping labels given a limit to the individual fairness violations, where a violation occurs when two similar examples in the training data have different labels. We first prove that the problem is NP-hard. We then propose an approximate linear programming algorithm and provide theoretical guarantees on how close its result is to the optimal solution in terms of the number of label flips. We also propose techniques for making the linear programming solution more optimal without exceeding the violations limit. Experiments on real datasets show that iFlipper significantly outperforms other pre-processing baselines in terms of individual fairness and accuracy on unseen test sets. In addition, iFlipper can be combined with in-processing techniques for even better results.

As machine learning becomes democratized in the era of Software 2.0, a serious bottleneck is acquiring enough data to ensure accurate and fair models. Recent techniques including crowdsourcing provide cost-effective ways to gather such data. However, simply acquiring data as much as possible is not necessarily an effective strategy for optimizing accuracy and fairness. For example, if an online app store has enough training data for certain slices of data (say American customers), but not for others, obtaining more American customer data will only bias the model training. Instead, we contend that one needs to selectively acquire data and propose Slice Tuner, which acquires possibly-different amounts of data per slice such that the model accuracy and fairness on all slices are optimized. This problem is different than labeling existing data (as in active learning or weak supervision) because the goal is obtaining the right amounts of new data. At its core, Slice Tuner maintains learning curves of slices that estimate the model accuracies given more data and uses convex optimization to find the best data acquisition strategy. The key challenges of estimating learning curves are that they may be inaccurate if there is not enough data, and there may be dependencies among slices where acquiring data for one slice influences the learning curves of others. We solve these issues by iteratively and efficiently updating the learning curves as more data is acquired. We evaluate Slice Tuner on real datasets using crowdsourcing for data acquisition and show that Slice Tuner significantly outperforms baselines in terms of model accuracy and fairness, even when the learning curves cannot be reliably estimated.

As machine learning systems become democratized, it becomes increasingly important to help users easily debug their models. However, current data tools are still primitive when it comes to helping users trace model performance problems all the way to the data. We focus on the particular problem of slicing data to identify subsets of the validation data where the model performs poorly. This is an important problem in model validation because the overall model performance can fail to reflect that of the smaller subsets, and slicing allows users to analyze the model performance on a more granular-level. Unlike general techniques (e.g., clustering) that can find arbitrary slices, our goal is to find interpretable slices (which are easier to take action compared to arbitrary subsets) that are problematic and large. We propose SliceFinder, which is an interactive framework for identifying such slices using statistical techniques. Applications include diagnosing model fairness and fraud detection, where identifying slices that are interpretable to humans is crucial. This research is part of a larger trend of Big data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration and opens many opportunities for new research.

As machine learning (ML) systems become democratized, it becomes increasingly important to help users easily debug their models. However, current data tools are still primitive when it comes to helping users trace model performance problems all the way to the data. We focus on the particular problem of slicing data to identify subsets of the validation data where the model performs poorly. This is an important problem in model validation because the overall model performance can fail to reflect that of the smaller subsets, and slicing allows users to analyze the model performance on a more granular-level. Unlike general techniques (e.g., clustering) that can find arbitrary slices, our goal is to find interpretable slices (which are easier to take action compared to arbitrary subsets) that are large and problematic. We propose Slice Finder, which is an interactive framework for identifying such slices using statistical techniques. Applications include diagnosing model fairness and fraud detection, where identifying slices that are interpretable to humans is crucial.