Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Samika Gupta
dblp:381/6113
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
bias mitigation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Mitigating Subgroup Unfairness in Machine Learning Classifiers: A Data-Driven Approach · ICDE 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Mitigating Subgroup Unfairness in Machine Learning Classifiers: A Data-Driven Approach · ICDE 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › group fairness
subgroup fairness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Mitigating Subgroup Unfairness in Machine Learning Classifiers: A Data-Driven Approach · ICDE 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
data preprocessing · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Mitigating Subgroup Unfairness in Machine Learning Classifiers: A Data-Driven ApproachabstractFairness in machine learning, particularly in classifiers, is receiving increasing attention. However, most studies on this topic focus on fairness metrics for a limited number of predefined groups and do not address fairness across intersectional subgroups. In this paper, we investigate ways to improve subgroup fairness where subgroups are defined by the intersection of protected attributes. Specifically, our paper reveals the correlation between the representation bias of training data and model fairness. We demonstrate that biased sample collection due to historical biases and a lack of control over data collection can lead to unfairness in learned models. We introduce the concept of an “Implicit Biased Set (IBS)”, which refers to regions in the intersectional attribute space where positive and negative examples are not proportionately represented. For example, if our training data set has a disproportionate representation of black male recidivists, then criminal risk assessment tools are more likely to discriminate against black males, even if they are innocent. We propose an efficient pre-processing approach that initially identifies IBS and then employs techniques to remedy the data collection within IBS. Our evaluation shows that our method effectively mitigates various subgroup biases regardless of the downstream machine learning models used. Yin Lin, Samika Gupta, H. V. Jagadish |
ICDE | 2 |