Document Actions
Citation and metadata
Recommended citation
Antonio Vetrò, Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach, 12 (2021) JIPITEC 272 para 1.
Download Citation
Endnote
%0 Journal Article %T Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach %A Vetrò, Antonio %J JIPITEC %D 2021 %V 12 %N 4 %@ 2190-3387 %F vetrò2021 %X Over the last two decades, the number of organizations -both in the public and private sector- which have automated decisional processes has grown notably. The phenomenon has been enabled by the availability of massive amounts of personal data and the development of software systems that use those data to optimize decisions with respect to certain optimization goals. Today, software systems are involved in a wide realm of decisions that are relevant for the lives of people and the exercise of their rights and freedoms. Illustrative examples are systems that score individuals for their possibility to pay back a debt, recommenders of the best candidates for a job or a house rent advertisement, or tools for automatic moderation of online debates. While advantages for using algorithmic decision making concern mainly scalability and economic affordability, on the other hand, several critical aspects have emerged, including systematic adverse impact for individuals belonging to minorities and disadvantaged groups. In this context, the terms data and algorithm bias have become familiar to researchers, industry leaders and policy makers, and much ink has been spelled on the concept of algorithm fairness, in order to produce more equitable results and to avoid discrimination. Our approach is different from the main corpus of research on algorithm fairness because we shift the focus from the outcomes of automated decision making systems to its inputs and processes. Instead, we lay the foundations of a risk assessment approach based on a measurable characteristic of input data, i.e. imbalance, which can lead to discriminating automated decisions. We then relate the imbalance to existing standards and risk assessment procedures. We believe that the proposed approach can be useful to a variety of stakeholders, e.g. producers and adopters of automated decision making software, policy makers, certification or audit authorities. This would allow for the assessment of the risk level of discriminations when using imbalanced data in decision making software. This assessment should prompt all the involved stakeholders to take appropriate actions to prevent adverse effects. Such discriminations, in fact, pose a significant obstacle to human rights and freedoms, as our societies increasingly rely on automated decision making. This work is intended to help mitigate this problem, and to contribute to the development of software systems that are socially sustainable and are in line with the shared values of our democratic societies.This paper is also available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5795184 %L 340 %K algorithm fairness %K data bias %K data ethics %K data governance %K digital policy %K discrimination risk %U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-54528 %P 272-288Download
Bibtex
@Article{vetrò2021,
author = "Vetr{\`o}, Antonio",
title = "Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach",
journal = "JIPITEC",
year = "2021",
volume = "12",
number = "4",
pages = "272--288",
keywords = "algorithm fairness; data bias; data ethics; data governance; digital policy; discrimination risk",
abstract = "Over the last two decades, the number of organizations -both in the public and private sector- which have automated decisional processes has grown notably. The phenomenon has been enabled by the availability of massive amounts of personal data and the development of software systems that use those data to optimize decisions with respect to certain optimization goals. Today, software systems are involved in a wide realm of decisions that are relevant for the lives of people and the exercise of their rights and freedoms. Illustrative examples are systems that score individuals for their possibility to pay back a debt, recommenders of the best candidates for a job or a house rent advertisement, or tools for automatic moderation of online debates. While advantages for using algorithmic decision making concern mainly scalability and economic affordability, on the other hand, several critical aspects have emerged, including systematic adverse impact for individuals belonging to minorities and disadvantaged groups. In this context, the terms data and algorithm bias have become familiar to researchers, industry leaders and policy makers, and much ink has been spelled on the concept of algorithm fairness, in order to produce more equitable results and to avoid discrimination. Our approach is different from the main corpus of research on algorithm fairness because we shift the focus from the outcomes of automated decision making systems to its inputs and processes. Instead, we lay the foundations of a risk assessment approach based on a measurable characteristic of input data, i.e. imbalance, which can lead to discriminating automated decisions. We then relate the imbalance to existing standards and risk assessment procedures. We believe that the proposed approach can be useful to a variety of stakeholders, e.g. producers and adopters of automated decision making software, policy makers, certification or audit authorities. This would allow for the assessment of the risk level of discriminations when using imbalanced data in decision making software. This assessment should prompt all the involved stakeholders to take appropriate actions to prevent adverse effects. Such discriminations, in fact, pose a significant obstacle to human rights and freedoms, as our societies increasingly rely on automated decision making. This work is intended to help mitigate this problem, and to contribute to the development of software systems that are socially sustainable and are in line with the shared values of our democratic societies.This paper is also available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5795184",
issn = "2190-3387",
url = "http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-54528"
}
Download
RIS
TY - JOUR AU - Vetrò, Antonio PY - 2021 DA - 2021// TI - Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach JO - JIPITEC SP - 272 EP - 288 VL - 12 IS - 4 KW - algorithm fairness KW - data bias KW - data ethics KW - data governance KW - digital policy KW - discrimination risk AB - Over the last two decades, the number of organizations -both in the public and private sector- which have automated decisional processes has grown notably. The phenomenon has been enabled by the availability of massive amounts of personal data and the development of software systems that use those data to optimize decisions with respect to certain optimization goals. Today, software systems are involved in a wide realm of decisions that are relevant for the lives of people and the exercise of their rights and freedoms. Illustrative examples are systems that score individuals for their possibility to pay back a debt, recommenders of the best candidates for a job or a house rent advertisement, or tools for automatic moderation of online debates. While advantages for using algorithmic decision making concern mainly scalability and economic affordability, on the other hand, several critical aspects have emerged, including systematic adverse impact for individuals belonging to minorities and disadvantaged groups. In this context, the terms data and algorithm bias have become familiar to researchers, industry leaders and policy makers, and much ink has been spelled on the concept of algorithm fairness, in order to produce more equitable results and to avoid discrimination. Our approach is different from the main corpus of research on algorithm fairness because we shift the focus from the outcomes of automated decision making systems to its inputs and processes. Instead, we lay the foundations of a risk assessment approach based on a measurable characteristic of input data, i.e. imbalance, which can lead to discriminating automated decisions. We then relate the imbalance to existing standards and risk assessment procedures. We believe that the proposed approach can be useful to a variety of stakeholders, e.g. producers and adopters of automated decision making software, policy makers, certification or audit authorities. This would allow for the assessment of the risk level of discriminations when using imbalanced data in decision making software. This assessment should prompt all the involved stakeholders to take appropriate actions to prevent adverse effects. Such discriminations, in fact, pose a significant obstacle to human rights and freedoms, as our societies increasingly rely on automated decision making. This work is intended to help mitigate this problem, and to contribute to the development of software systems that are socially sustainable and are in line with the shared values of our democratic societies.This paper is also available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5795184 SN - 2190-3387 UR - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-54528 ID - vetrò2021 ER -Download
Wordbib
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <b:Sources SelectedStyle="" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" > <b:Source> <b:Tag>vetrò2021</b:Tag> <b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType> <b:Year>2021</b:Year> <b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle> <b:Volume>12</b:Volume> <b:Issue>4</b:Issue> <b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-54528</b:Url> <b:Pages>272-288</b:Pages> <b:Author> <b:Author><b:NameList> <b:Person><b:Last>Vetrò</b:Last><b:First>Antonio</b:First></b:Person> </b:NameList></b:Author> </b:Author> <b:Title>Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach</b:Title> <b:Comments>Over the last two decades, the number of organizations -both in the public and private sector- which have automated decisional processes has grown notably. The phenomenon has been enabled by the availability of massive amounts of personal data and the development of software systems that use those data to optimize decisions with respect to certain optimization goals. Today, software systems are involved in a wide realm of decisions that are relevant for the lives of people and the exercise of their rights and freedoms. Illustrative examples are systems that score individuals for their possibility to pay back a debt, recommenders of the best candidates for a job or a house rent advertisement, or tools for automatic moderation of online debates. While advantages for using algorithmic decision making concern mainly scalability and economic affordability, on the other hand, several critical aspects have emerged, including systematic adverse impact for individuals belonging to minorities and disadvantaged groups. In this context, the terms data and algorithm bias have become familiar to researchers, industry leaders and policy makers, and much ink has been spelled on the concept of algorithm fairness, in order to produce more equitable results and to avoid discrimination. Our approach is different from the main corpus of research on algorithm fairness because we shift the focus from the outcomes of automated decision making systems to its inputs and processes. Instead, we lay the foundations of a risk assessment approach based on a measurable characteristic of input data, i.e. imbalance, which can lead to discriminating automated decisions. We then relate the imbalance to existing standards and risk assessment procedures. We believe that the proposed approach can be useful to a variety of stakeholders, e.g. producers and adopters of automated decision making software, policy makers, certification or audit authorities. This would allow for the assessment of the risk level of discriminations when using imbalanced data in decision making software. This assessment should prompt all the involved stakeholders to take appropriate actions to prevent adverse effects. Such discriminations, in fact, pose a significant obstacle to human rights and freedoms, as our societies increasingly rely on automated decision making. This work is intended to help mitigate this problem, and to contribute to the development of software systems that are socially sustainable and are in line with the shared values of our democratic societies.This paper is also available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5795184</b:Comments> </b:Source> </b:Sources>Download
ISI
PT Journal AU Vetrò, A TI Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach SO JIPITEC PY 2021 BP 272 EP 288 VL 12 IS 4 DE algorithm fairness; data bias; data ethics; data governance; digital policy; discrimination risk AB Over the last two decades, the number of organizations -both in the public and private sector- which have automated decisional processes has grown notably. The phenomenon has been enabled by the availability of massive amounts of personal data and the development of software systems that use those data to optimize decisions with respect to certain optimization goals. Today, software systems are involved in a wide realm of decisions that are relevant for the lives of people and the exercise of their rights and freedoms. Illustrative examples are systems that score individuals for their possibility to pay back a debt, recommenders of the best candidates for a job or a house rent advertisement, or tools for automatic moderation of online debates. While advantages for using algorithmic decision making concern mainly scalability and economic affordability, on the other hand, several critical aspects have emerged, including systematic adverse impact for individuals belonging to minorities and disadvantaged groups. In this context, the terms data and algorithm bias have become familiar to researchers, industry leaders and policy makers, and much ink has been spelled on the concept of algorithm fairness, in order to produce more equitable results and to avoid discrimination. Our approach is different from the main corpus of research on algorithm fairness because we shift the focus from the outcomes of automated decision making systems to its inputs and processes. Instead, we lay the foundations of a risk assessment approach based on a measurable characteristic of input data, i.e. imbalance, which can lead to discriminating automated decisions. We then relate the imbalance to existing standards and risk assessment procedures. We believe that the proposed approach can be useful to a variety of stakeholders, e.g. producers and adopters of automated decision making software, policy makers, certification or audit authorities. This would allow for the assessment of the risk level of discriminations when using imbalanced data in decision making software. This assessment should prompt all the involved stakeholders to take appropriate actions to prevent adverse effects. Such discriminations, in fact, pose a significant obstacle to human rights and freedoms, as our societies increasingly rely on automated decision making. This work is intended to help mitigate this problem, and to contribute to the development of software systems that are socially sustainable and are in line with the shared values of our democratic societies.This paper is also available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5795184 ERDownload
Mods
<mods>
<titleInfo>
<title>Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="family">Vetrò</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Antonio</namePart>
</name>
<abstract>Over the last two decades, the number of organizations -both in the public and private sector- which have automated decisional processes has grown notably. The phenomenon has been enabled by the availability of massive amounts of personal data and the development of software systems that use those data to optimize decisions with respect to certain optimization goals. Today, software systems are involved in a wide realm of decisions that are relevant for the lives of people and the exercise of their rights and freedoms. Illustrative examples are systems that score individuals for their possibility to pay back a debt, recommenders of the best candidates for a job or a house rent advertisement, or tools for automatic moderation of online debates.
While advantages for using algorithmic decision making concern mainly scalability and economic affordability, on the other hand, several critical aspects have emerged, including systematic adverse impact for individuals belonging to minorities and disadvantaged groups. In this context, the terms data and algorithm bias have become familiar to researchers, industry leaders and policy makers, and much ink has been spelled on the concept of algorithm fairness, in order to produce more equitable results and to avoid discrimination. Our approach is different from the main corpus of research on algorithm fairness because we shift the focus from the outcomes of automated decision making systems to its inputs and processes. Instead, we lay the foundations of a risk assessment approach based on a measurable characteristic of input data, i.e. imbalance, which can lead to discriminating automated decisions. We then relate the imbalance to existing standards and risk assessment procedures.
We believe that the proposed approach can be useful to a variety of stakeholders, e.g. producers and adopters of automated decision making software, policy makers, certification or audit authorities. This would allow for the assessment of the risk level of discriminations when using imbalanced data in decision making software. This assessment should prompt all the involved stakeholders to take appropriate actions to prevent adverse effects. Such discriminations, in fact, pose a significant obstacle to human rights and freedoms, as our societies increasingly rely on automated decision making. This work is intended to help mitigate this problem, and to contribute to the development of software systems that are socially sustainable and are in line with the shared values of our democratic societies.
This paper is also available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5795184</abstract>
<subject>
<topic>algorithm fairness</topic>
<topic>data bias</topic>
<topic>data ethics</topic>
<topic>data governance</topic>
<topic>digital policy</topic>
<topic>discrimination risk</topic>
</subject>
<classification authority="ddc">340</classification>
<relatedItem type="host">
<genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
<genre>academic journal</genre>
<titleInfo>
<title>JIPITEC</title>
</titleInfo>
<part>
<detail type="volume">
<number>12</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue">
<number>4</number>
</detail>
<date>2021</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>272</start>
<end>288</end>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
<identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-54528</identifier>
<identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-54528</identifier>
<identifier type="citekey">vetrò2021</identifier>
</mods>
Download
Full Metadata
| Bibliographic Citation | Journal of intellectual property, information technology and electronic commerce law 12 (2021) 4 |
|---|---|
| Title |
Imbalanced data as risk factor of discriminating automated decisions: a measurement-based approach (eng) |
| Author | Antonio Vetrò |
| Language | eng |
| Abstract | Over the last two decades, the number of organizations -both in the public and private sector- which have automated decisional processes has grown notably. The phenomenon has been enabled by the availability of massive amounts of personal data and the development of software systems that use those data to optimize decisions with respect to certain optimization goals. Today, software systems are involved in a wide realm of decisions that are relevant for the lives of people and the exercise of their rights and freedoms. Illustrative examples are systems that score individuals for their possibility to pay back a debt, recommenders of the best candidates for a job or a house rent advertisement, or tools for automatic moderation of online debates. While advantages for using algorithmic decision making concern mainly scalability and economic affordability, on the other hand, several critical aspects have emerged, including systematic adverse impact for individuals belonging to minorities and disadvantaged groups. In this context, the terms data and algorithm bias have become familiar to researchers, industry leaders and policy makers, and much ink has been spelled on the concept of algorithm fairness, in order to produce more equitable results and to avoid discrimination. Our approach is different from the main corpus of research on algorithm fairness because we shift the focus from the outcomes of automated decision making systems to its inputs and processes. Instead, we lay the foundations of a risk assessment approach based on a measurable characteristic of input data, i.e. imbalance, which can lead to discriminating automated decisions. We then relate the imbalance to existing standards and risk assessment procedures. We believe that the proposed approach can be useful to a variety of stakeholders, e.g. producers and adopters of automated decision making software, policy makers, certification or audit authorities. This would allow for the assessment of the risk level of discriminations when using imbalanced data in decision making software. This assessment should prompt all the involved stakeholders to take appropriate actions to prevent adverse effects. Such discriminations, in fact, pose a significant obstacle to human rights and freedoms, as our societies increasingly rely on automated decision making. This work is intended to help mitigate this problem, and to contribute to the development of software systems that are socially sustainable and are in line with the shared values of our democratic societies. This paper is also available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5795184 |
| Subject | algorithm fairness, data bias, data ethics, data governance, digital policy, discrimination risk |
| DDC | 340 |
| Rights | DPPL |
| URN: | urn:nbn:de:0009-29-54528 |
