Diagnosing failures of fairness transfer across distribution shift in real-world medical settings
Authors:
Jessica Schrouff,
Natalie Harris,
Oluwasanmi Koyejo,
Ibrahim Alabdulmohsin,
Eva Schnider,
Krista Opsahl-Ong,
Alex Brown,
Subhrajit Roy,
Diana Mincu,
Christina Chen,
Awa Dieng,
Yuan Liu,
Vivek Natarajan,
Alan Karthikesalingam,
Katherine Heller,
Silvia Chiappa,
Alexander D'Amour
Abstract:
Diagnosing and mitigating changes in model fairness under distribution shift is an important component of the safe deployment of machine learning in healthcare settings. Importantly, the success of any mitigation strategy strongly depends on the structure of the shift. Despite this, there has been little discussion of how to empirically assess the structure of a distribution shift that one is enco…
▽ More
Diagnosing and mitigating changes in model fairness under distribution shift is an important component of the safe deployment of machine learning in healthcare settings. Importantly, the success of any mitigation strategy strongly depends on the structure of the shift. Despite this, there has been little discussion of how to empirically assess the structure of a distribution shift that one is encountering in practice. In this work, we adopt a causal framing to motivate conditional independence tests as a key tool for characterizing distribution shifts. Using our approach in two medical applications, we show that this knowledge can help diagnose failures of fairness transfer, including cases where real-world shifts are more complex than is often assumed in the literature. Based on these results, we discuss potential remedies at each step of the machine learning pipeline.
△ Less
Submitted 10 February, 2023; v1 submitted 2 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learning
Authors:
Alexander D'Amour,
Katherine Heller,
Dan Moldovan,
Ben Adlam,
Babak Alipanahi,
Alex Beutel,
Christina Chen,
Jonathan Deaton,
Jacob Eisenstein,
Matthew D. Hoffman,
Farhad Hormozdiari,
Neil Houlsby,
Shaobo Hou,
Ghassen Jerfel,
Alan Karthikesalingam,
Mario Lucic,
Yian Ma,
Cory McLean,
Diana Mincu,
Akinori Mitani,
Andrea Montanari,
Zachary Nado,
Vivek Natarajan,
Christopher Nielson,
Thomas F. Osborne
, et al. (15 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
ML models often exhibit unexpectedly poor behavior when they are deployed in real-world domains. We identify underspecification as a key reason for these failures. An ML pipeline is underspecified when it can return many predictors with equivalently strong held-out performance in the training domain. Underspecification is common in modern ML pipelines, such as those based on deep learning. Predict…
▽ More
ML models often exhibit unexpectedly poor behavior when they are deployed in real-world domains. We identify underspecification as a key reason for these failures. An ML pipeline is underspecified when it can return many predictors with equivalently strong held-out performance in the training domain. Underspecification is common in modern ML pipelines, such as those based on deep learning. Predictors returned by underspecified pipelines are often treated as equivalent based on their training domain performance, but we show here that such predictors can behave very differently in deployment domains. This ambiguity can lead to instability and poor model behavior in practice, and is a distinct failure mode from previously identified issues arising from structural mismatch between training and deployment domains. We show that this problem appears in a wide variety of practical ML pipelines, using examples from computer vision, medical imaging, natural language processing, clinical risk prediction based on electronic health records, and medical genomics. Our results show the need to explicitly account for underspecification in modeling pipelines that are intended for real-world deployment in any domain.
△ Less
Submitted 24 November, 2020; v1 submitted 6 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
