Exploring How Machine Learning Practitioners (Try To) Use Fairness Toolkits

AI-generated keywords: ML fairness toolkits practitioner needs exploratory data analysis external pressure stakeholders

AI-generated Key Points

  • Open-source machine learning (ML) fairness toolkits have been developed to help practitioners address unfairness in their systems.
  • Little research has been conducted on how these toolkits are used in practice.
  • A study was conducted with 11 industry practitioners who were tasked with building a model to determine which students needed additional tutoring resources using the Student Performance dataset.
  • The study identified opportunities for fairness toolkits to better address practitioner needs and scaffold them in using toolkits effectively and responsibly.
  • External pressure from stakeholders was identified as an important factor that drives practitioners' engagement with fairness issues.
  • Future toolkits should consider incorporating features that enable practitioners to communicate effectively with stakeholders about fairness concerns.
  • The study provides valuable insights into how industry practitioners use existing ML fairness toolkits in practice and highlights areas where improvements can be made.
  • The Colab notebook used in the study is available for others conducting relevant evaluations.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Wesley Hanwen Deng, Manish Nagireddy, Michelle Seng Ah Lee, Jatinder Singh, Zhiwei Steven Wu, Kenneth Holstein, Haiyi Zhu

ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (ACM FAccT 2022)
License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Recent years have seen the development of many open-source ML fairness toolkits aimed at helping ML practitioners assess and address unfairness in their systems. However, there has been little research investigating how ML practitioners actually use these toolkits in practice. In this paper, we conducted the first in-depth empirical exploration of how industry practitioners (try to) work with existing fairness toolkits. In particular, we conducted think-aloud interviews to understand how participants learn about and use fairness toolkits, and explored the generality of our findings through an anonymous online survey. We identified several opportunities for fairness toolkits to better address practitioner needs and scaffold them in using toolkits effectively and responsibly. Based on these findings, we highlight implications for the design of future open-source fairness toolkits that can support practitioners in better contextualizing, communicating, and collaborating around ML fairness efforts.

Submitted to arXiv on 13 May. 2022

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2205.06922v2

In recent years, there has been a surge in the development of open-source machine learning (ML) fairness toolkits aimed at helping practitioners assess and address unfairness in their systems. However, little research has been conducted to investigate how these toolkits are used in practice. To bridge this gap, a study was conducted to explore how industry practitioners work with existing fairness toolkits. The study involved 11 participants who completed all phases of the research, including a pre-interview task and a 60-minute think-aloud semi-structured interview. The participants were tasked with building a model to determine which students were in need of additional tutoring resources using the Student Performance dataset, which includes student grades as well as demographic, social, and school-related features. The aim was to observe participants' thought processes during the exploratory data analysis (EDA) and problem formulation stages. The study identified several opportunities for fairness toolkits to better address practitioner needs and scaffold them in using toolkits effectively and responsibly. The findings highlight implications for future open-source fairness toolkits that can support practitioners in better contextualizing, communicating, and collaborating around ML fairness efforts. For instance, external pressure from stakeholders was identified as an important factor that drives practitioners' engagement with fairness issues. Therefore, future toolkits should consider incorporating features that enable practitioners to communicate effectively with stakeholders about fairness concerns. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into how industry practitioners use existing ML fairness toolkits in practice and highlights areas where improvements can be made to better support them in addressing unfairness issues. The Colab notebook used in the study is also available for others conducting relevant evaluations.
Created on 06 May. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.