This assignment asks you to play the role of a Data Scientist tasked
with building an algorithmic decision making system. You will:
- Define the inputs/outputs of the system, the decisions being made,
and the relationship of the decisions to the true outcome.
- Build the decision making system and explain the context under
which the model was trained using Model Cards for Model
Reporting.
- Analyze the model performance with respect to utility and fairness
benchmarks, interpreting the results using the context developed in
paper-1.
- Incorporate either:
a. analyses from part-2 of the course to assess the fairness of
your decision making system (e.g. Threshold Tests, Individual
Fairness Criteria, Contraction, Feedback Loop Analysis,
Intersectionality).
b. fairness-focused modeling procedures from part-2 of the course
to examine the effect such procedures have on decisions made by the
system.
You should aim to incorporate two different topics from the second
half of the course into your paper. You are encouraged to continue
with the subject-matter you began studying in paper 1. You will meet
with course staff during week 8 to propose a plan for your paper.
This paper will require a lot more code and quantitative analysis than
the first. You do not need to submit code; only include results.
This assignment is a group assignment. You may work individually, in
the same group of 2 as paper-1, or a different group of 2 entirely.
Assignment FAQ
Am I required to build my own model for this project?
- In most cases, yes. An objective of this assignment is to
understand, from a Data Scientist’s perspective, what it’s like to
build a model from end-to-end (including the context under which it
operates and how it determines decisions). Part of building a model
is doing a self-audit to surface potential issues of fairness.
In what cases do I not need to build/audit a model?
- Investigating threshold testing and individual fairness do not
strictly require building a model to investigate these
topics. However, comparing results of an analysis of existing
(potential) inequities to the outcomes of your algorithmic decision
makes a richer paper. If you plan on a very thorough investigation
into one of these topics, however, you do not need to build a model.
When building a model to audit, what aspects of it should be described?
- You should describe how the model would work in real-life (how would
it be used? What features would be available when using it? How are
decisions made from the model output? from a score?). At a minimum,
you should then compare the model performance (utility and fairness)
with the observed outcomes. You choice of utility and fairness
should be thorough and justified.
How are the topics listed at top incorporated?
- Investigate the topics in the context of your model? Does
preprocessing help? How does your model perform on a threshold test?
on feedback loop evolution? Individual Fairness?
How ‘good’ should the model be?
- Just good enough to do a convincing fairness analysis. Don’t waste
time ‘eeking out a bit more performance’, as that goes against the
point of the course!
- Aim for light feature engineering, along the lines of project-5 in
DSC 80. Use interpretable models when possible (logistic regression,
random forest, gradient boosted trees).
Are there topics that pair together well?
-
Threshold tests are a larger topic (look for code/libraries online;
don’t implement it from scratch). They would pair particularly well
with “luck egalitarian” preprocessing.
-
Individual Fairness and Intersectionality pair well together. When
looking at (individually) unfair decisions, do a data analysis to
understand if that unfairness is attributable to an attribute (and
perhaps how it interacts with group-level unfairness)
-
In-processing and intersectional analysis go well together (see
lecture!)
-
Pre/Post-processing pairs well with selective labelling approaches
(including contraction and label augmentation)
-
Feedback Loop modeling is a larger topic that would be well
complemented with selective labeling or preprocessing. If exploring
this subject matter, try to replicate the house price estimation
procedure from lecture.