Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mary Versa Clemens-Sewall
dblp:392/6697
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Multiaccuracy and Multicalibration via Proxy Groups · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › fairness criteria
multicalibration |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Multiaccuracy and Multicalibration via Proxy Groups · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › algorithmic fairness
fairness without sensitive attributes |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Multiaccuracy and Multicalibration via Proxy Groups · ICML 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
upper bounds on fairness violations · 0.9proxy-sensitive attributes · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Multiaccuracy and Multicalibration via Proxy GroupsabstractAs the use of predictive machine learning algorithms increases in high-stakes decision-making, it is imperative that these algorithms are fair across sensitive groups. However, measuring and enforcing fairness in real-world applications can be challenging due to missing or incomplete sensitive group information. Proxy-sensitive attributes have been proposed as a practical and effective solution in these settings, but only for parity-based fairness notions. Knowing how to evaluate and control for fairness with missing sensitive group data for newer, different, and more flexible frameworks, such as multiaccuracy and multicalibration, remains unexplored. In this work, we address this gap by demonstrating that in the absence of sensitive group data, proxy-sensitive attributes can provably be used to derive actionable upper bounds on the true multiaccuracy and multicalibration violations, providing insights into a predictive model’s potential worst-case fairness violations. Additionally, we show that adjusting models to satisfy multiaccuracy and multicalibration across proxy-sensitive attributes can significantly mitigate these violations for the true, but unknown, sensitive groups. Through several experiments on real-world datasets, we illustrate that approximate multiaccuracy and multicalibration can be achieved even when sensitive group data is incomplete or unavailable. Beepul Bharti, Mary Versa Clemens-Sewall, Paul H. Yi, Jeremias Sulam |
ICML | 2 |