핵심 개념
Fairness metrics preferences vary based on personal attributes and national context.
초록
The content discusses a study evaluating fairness metrics across borders, focusing on human perceptions. It explores the impact of personal attributes and national context on the choice of fairness metrics in decision-making scenarios. The study collected responses from 4,000 participants in China, France, Japan, and the United States. Key highlights include:
- Importance of fairness in AI systems.
- Group fairness for equitable outcomes.
- Various fairness metrics like quantitative parity, demographic parity, equal opportunity, and equalized odds.
- Survey design with three decision-making scenarios: hiring, art project award, and employee award.
- Findings showing country influence on metric choices.
- Limited impact of gender and religion compared to nationality.
- Correlations between personal attributes.
통계
Several surveys have been conducted to evaluate fairness metrics with human perceptions of fairness.
Our survey consists of three distinct scenarios paired with four fairness metrics.
Participants provided information on their age, gender, ethnicity, religions, education, and experiences.
The statistical differences can be meaningfully derived thanks to a large number of participants.
Participants often selected equal opportunity in the US.
France often selects quantitative parity though the difference of scores is small.
Equalized odds in China and equal opportunity in Japan and the US are higher than other metrics.
Males had a slightly higher preference for demographic parity compared to females.
Religion does not have a large impact compared to countries.
There are specifically large correlations between them except for the correlation between Hispanic/Latinx and Islam in Japan.
In terms of 20s select quantitative parity while 30s and 40s select demographic parity.
"Less than HS" and "some post-secondary" often select quantitative parity.
There are no clear trends among experiences.