What does it mean for an algorithm to be biased? In U.S. law, unintentional bias is encoded via disparate impact, which occurs when a selection process has widely different outcomes for different groups, even as it appears to be neutral. This legal determination hinges on a definition of a protected class (ethnicity, gender) and an explicit description of the process.When computers are involved, determining disparate impact (and hence bias) is harder. It might not be possible to disclose the process. In addition, even if the process is open, it might be hard to elucidate in a legal setting how the algorithm makes its decisions. Instead of requiring access to the process, we propose making inferences based on the data it uses.We present four contributions. First, we link disparate impact to a measure of classification accuracy that while known, has received relatively little attention. Second, we propose a test for disparate impact based on how well the protected class can be predicted from the other attributes. Third, we describe methods by which data might be made unbiased. Finally, we present empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of our test for disparate impact and our approach for both masking bias and preserving relevant information in the data. Interestingly, our approach resembles some actual selection practices that have recently received legal scrutiny.

Computers are increasingly used to make decisions that have significant impact in people's lives. Often, these predictions can affect different population subgroups disproportionately. As a result, the issue of fairness has received much recent interest, and a number of fairness-enhanced classifiers and predictors have appeared in the literature. This paper seeks to study the following questions: how do these different techniques fundamentally compare to one another, and what accounts for the differences? Specifically, we seek to bring attention to many under-appreciated aspects of such fairness-enhancing interventions. Concretely, we present the results of an open benchmark we have developed that lets us compare a number of different algorithms under a variety of fairness measures, and a large number of existing datasets. We find that although different algorithms tend to prefer specific formulations of fairness preservations, many of these measures strongly correlate with one another. In addition, we find that fairness-preserving algorithms tend to be sensitive to fluctuations in dataset composition (simulated in our benchmark by varying training-test splits), indicating that fairness interventions might be more brittle than previously thought.

SUMMARYThe first Provenance Challenge was set up in order to provide a forum for the community to understand the capabilities of different provenance systems and the expressiveness of their provenance representations. To this end, a functional magnetic resonance imaging workflow was defined, which participants had to either simulate or run in order to produce some provenance representation, from which a set of identified queries had to be implemented and executed. Sixteen teams responded to the challenge, and submitted their inputs. In this paper, we present the challenge workflow and queries, and summarize the participants' contributions.

No abstract

Consider real-time exploration of large multidimensional spatiotemporal datasets with billions of entries, each defined by a location, a time, and other attributes. Are certain attributes correlated spatially or temporally? Are there trends or outliers in the data? Answering these questions requires aggregation over arbitrary regions of the domain and attributes of the data. Many relational databases implement the well-known data cube aggregation operation, which in a sense precomputes every possible aggregate query over the database. Data cubes are sometimes assumed to take a prohibitively large amount of space, and to consequently require disk storage. In contrast, we show how to construct a data cube that fits in a modern laptop's main memory, even for billions of entries; we call this data structure a nanocube. We present algorithms to compute and query a nanocube, and show how it can be used to generate well-known visual encodings such as heatmaps, histograms, and parallel coordinate plots. When compared to exact visualizations created by scanning an entire dataset, nanocube plots have bounded screen error across a variety of scales, thanks to a hierarchical structure in space and time. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our technique on a variety of real-world datasets, and present memory, timing, and network bandwidth measurements. We find that the timings for the queries in our examples are dominated by network and user-interaction latencies.