Studying Up Machine Learning Data: Why Talk About Bias When We Mean Power?
arXiv:2109.08131
Abstract
Research in machine learning (ML) has primarily argued that models trained on incomplete or biased datasets can lead to discriminatory outputs. In this commentary, we propose moving the research focus beyond bias-oriented framings by adopting a power-aware perspective to "study up" ML datasets. This means accounting for historical inequities, labor conditions, and epistemological standpoints inscribed in data. We draw on HCI and CSCW work to support our argument, critically analyze previous research, and point at two co-existing lines of work within our community -- one bias-oriented, the other power-aware. This way, we highlight the need for dialogue and cooperation in three areas: data quality, data work, and data documentation. In the first area, we argue that reducing societal problems to "bias" misses the context-based nature of data. In the second one, we highlight the corporate forces and market imperatives involved in the labor of data workers that subsequently shape ML datasets. Finally, we propose expanding current transparency-oriented efforts in dataset documentation to reflect the social contexts of data design and production.
arXiv commentAccepted at ACM Group 2022. Forthcoming on Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
References in corpus (7)
- Data Science as Political Action: Grounding Data Science in a Politics of Justice
- The Dataset Nutrition Label: A Framework To Drive Higher Data Quality Standards
- Data and its (dis)contents: A survey of dataset development and use in machine learning research
- Bringing the People Back In: Contesting Benchmark Machine Learning Datasets
- The Future of Work Is Here: Toward a Comprehensive Approach to Artificial Intelligence and Labour
- Measuring Social Biases of Crowd Workers using Counterfactual Queries
- Wisdom for the Crowd: Discoursive Power in Annotation Instructions for Computer Vision