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

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.

ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (ACM FAccT 2022)

References in corpus (16)

• Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning
• Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
• Problem Formulation and Fairness
• Trust in Data Science: Collaboration, Translation, and Accountability in Corporate Data Science Projects
• A Case for Humans-in-the-Loop: Decisions in the Presence of Erroneous Algorithmic Scores
• Do Datasets Have Politics? Disciplinary Values in Computer Vision Dataset Development
• This Thing Called Fairness: Disciplinary Confusion Realizing a Value in Technology
• Data Vision: Learning to See Through Algorithmic Abstraction
• Discovering and Validating AI Errors With Crowdsourced Failure Reports
• Factors Influencing Perceived Fairness in Algorithmic Decision-Making: Algorithm Outcomes, Development Procedures, and Individual Differences
• Studying Up Machine Learning Data: Why Talk About Bias When We Mean Power?
• Between Subjectivity and Imposition: Power Dynamics in Data Annotation for Computer Vision
• How Much Automation Does a Data Scientist Want?
• "What We Can't Measure, We Can't Understand": Challenges to Demographic Data Procurement in the Pursuit of Fairness
• Uncertainty Quantification 360: A Holistic Toolkit for Quantifying and Communicating the Uncertainty of AI
• Fairkit, Fairkit, on the Wall, Who's the Fairest of Them All? Supporting Data Scientists in Training Fair Models

Cited by in corpus (26)

• Design Principles for Generative AI Applications
• Seeing Like a Toolkit: How Toolkits Envision the Work of AI Ethics
• Investigating How Practitioners Use Human-AI Guidelines: A Case Study on the People + AI Guidebook
• Understanding Practices, Challenges, and Opportunities for User-Engaged Algorithm Auditing in Industry Practice
• Zeno: An Interactive Framework for Behavioral Evaluation of Machine Learning
• Real Risks of Fake Data: Synthetic Data, Diversity-Washing and Consent Circumvention
• Towards AI Accountability Infrastructure: Gaps and Opportunities in AI Audit Tooling
• Out of Context: Investigating the Bias and Fairness Concerns of "Artificial Intelligence as a Service"
• From Paper to Card: Transforming Design Implications with Generative AI
• Can Fairness be Automated? Guidelines and Opportunities for Fairness-aware AutoML
• The Fall of an Algorithm: Characterizing the Dynamics Toward Abandonment
• LLM-Driven Robots Risk Enacting Discrimination, Violence, and Unlawful Actions
• Fairness Evaluation in Text Classification: Machine Learning Practitioner Perspectives of Individual and Group Fairness
• The "Who", "What", and "How" of Responsible AI Governance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of (Actor, Stage)-Specific Tools
• SuperNOVA: Design Strategies and Opportunities for Interactive Visualization in Computational Notebooks
• Access Denied: Meaningful Data Access for Quantitative Algorithm Audits
• "Come to us first": Centering Community Organizations in Artificial Intelligence for Social Good Partnerships
• Supporting Industry Computing Researchers in Assessing, Articulating, and Addressing the Potential Negative Societal Impact of Their Work
• Identifying the Barriers to Human-Centered Design in the Workplace: Perspectives from UX Professionals
• Articulation Work and Tinkering for Fairness in Machine Learning
• Trustworthy, responsible, ethical AI in manufacturing and supply chains: synthesis and emerging research questions
• Help or Hinder? Evaluating the Impact of Fairness Metrics and Algorithms in Visualizations for Consensus Ranking
• Organization Matters: A Qualitative Study of Organizational Dynamics in Red Teaming Practices for Generative AI
• Vipera: Towards systematic auditing of generative text-to-image models at scale
• Talking About the Assumption in the Room
• Compliant But Unsatisfactory: The Gap Between Auditing Standards and Practices for Probabilistic Genotyping Software