Cited by 468Machine Learning and Data ClassificationMachine Learning and AlgorithmsData Mining and Machine Learning Applications

Building Classifiers with Independency Constraints

Calders, Toon, Kamiran, Faisal, Pechenizkiy, Mykola·2009·2009 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops

Abstract

In this paper we study the problem of classifier learning where the input data contains unjustified dependencies between some data attributes and the class label. Such cases arise for example when the training data is collected from different sources with different labeling criteria or when the data is generated by a biased decision process. When a classifier is trained directly on such data, these undesirable dependencies will carry over to the classifier's predictions. In order to tackle this problem, we study the classification with independency constraints problem: find an accurate model for which the predictions are independent from a given binary attribute. We propose two solutions for this problem and present an empirical validation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icdmw.2009.83

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Prior work on detecting discrimination has focused on measuring correlation or mutual information between inputs and outputs, discrepancies in fractions of inputs that produce a given output, or discrepancies in output probability distributions.

    “Prior work on detecting discrimination has focused on measuring correlation or mutual information between inputs and outputs [79], discrepancies in the fractions of inputs that produce a given output [18, 19, 39-42, 87-89, 91], or discrepancies in output probability distributions [51].”

    From Fairness testing: testing software for discrimination (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

  • Reducing discrimination (CV score) in classifiers often fails to remove causal discrimination and discrimination against certain groups.

    “Reducing discrimination (CV score) in classifiers [18, 40, 88, 91], as our evaluation has shown, often fails to remove causal discrimination and discrimination against certain groups.”

    From Fairness testing: testing software for discrimination (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 11 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Calders, T., Kamiran, F., & Pechenizkiy, M.
Affiliations
Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
Venue
2009 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2009-12
Pages
13-18
ISSN
2375-9259 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2116666691
Cited by
468
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.58
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE ... International Conference on Data Mining workshops (publishedVersion)
  • TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Data Mining and Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
biased training data, classifier training

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