Cited by 48Ethics and Social Impacts of AIPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Anti-discrimination learning: a causal modeling-based framework

Open access
Zhang, Lu, Wu, Xintao·2017·International Journal of Data Science and Analytics

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s41060-017-0058-x

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Anti-discrimination rules to define legal policies may prevent dissemination of discrimination against certain groups in the algorithm.

    “Anti-discrimination rules to define legal policies that may prevent dissemination of discrimination against certain group in the algorithm [163].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Bickel, P.J., Hammel, E.A., OConnell, J.W.: Sex bias in gradu- ate admissions: data from Berkeley. Science 187(4175), 398-404 (1975)
  2. Dwork, C., Hardt, M., Pitassi, T., Reingold, O., Zemel, R.: Fair- ness through awareness. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, pp. 214-226. ACM, (2012)
  3. Pearl, J.: Causality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)
  4. Qureshi, B., Kamiran, F., Karim, A., Ruggieri, S.: Causal discrimi- nation discovery through propensity score analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.03735 (2016) · arXiv
  5. Žliobaite, I., Kamiran, F., Calders, T.: Handling conditional dis- crimination. In: 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), pp. 992-1001. IEEE, (2011)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, L., & Wu, X.
Affiliations
University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
Corresponding author
Wu, Xintao
Venue
International Journal of Data Science and Analytics
Published
2017-05-18
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
1-16
ISSN
  • 2364-415X (ISSN-L)
  • 2364-4168
OpenAlex
W2616536620
Cited by
48
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
13.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Data Science and Analytics (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
Funders
Division of Information and Intelligent Systems (1646654)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Keywords
discrimination prevention, causal models, association versus causation, direct and indirect discrimination, biased training data, algorithmic fairness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review