IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v26y2024i4p1567-1585.html

Wasserstein Robust Classification with Fairness Constraints

Author

Listed:
  • Yijie Wang

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Viet Anh Nguyen

    (Department of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)

  • Grani A. Hanasusanto

    (Department of Industrial and Enterprise Systems Engineering, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801)

Abstract

Problem definition : Data analytics models and machine learning algorithms are increasingly deployed to support consequential decision-making processes, from deciding which applicants will receive job offers and loans to university enrollments and medical interventions. However, recent studies show these models may unintentionally amplify human bias and yield significant unfavorable decisions to specific groups. Methodology/results : We propose a distributionally robust classification model with a fairness constraint that encourages the classifier to be fair in the equality of opportunity criterion. We use a type- ∞ Wasserstein ambiguity set centered at the empirical distribution to represent distributional uncertainty and derive a conservative reformulation for the worst-case equal opportunity unfairness measure. We show that the model is equivalent to a mixed binary conic optimization problem, which standard off-the-shelf solvers can solve. We propose a convex, hinge-loss-based model for large problem instances whose reformulation does not incur binary variables to improve scalability. Moreover, we also consider the distributionally robust learning problem with a generic ground transportation cost to hedge against the label and sensitive attribute uncertainties. We numerically examine the performance of our proposed models on five real-world data sets related to individual analysis. Compared with the state-of-the-art methods, our proposed approaches significantly improve fairness with negligible loss of predictive accuracy in the testing data set. Managerial implications : Our paper raises awareness that bias may arise when predictive models are used in service and operations. It generally comes from human bias, for example, imbalanced data collection or low sample sizes, and is further amplified by algorithms. Incorporating fairness constraints and the distributionally robust optimization (DRO) scheme is a powerful way to alleviate algorithmic biases.

Suggested Citation

  • Yijie Wang & Viet Anh Nguyen & Grani A. Hanasusanto, 2024. "Wasserstein Robust Classification with Fairness Constraints," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 1567-1585, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:26:y:2024:i:4:p:1567-1585
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2022.0230
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.0230
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2022.0230?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Negin Golrezaei & Hamid Nazerzadeh & Paat Rusmevichientong, 2014. "Real-Time Optimization of Personalized Assortments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1532-1551, June.
    2. Lennart Baardman & Setareh Borjian Boroujeni & Tamar Cohen-Hillel & Kiran Panchamgam & Georgia Perakis, 2023. "Detecting Customer Trends for Optimal Promotion Targeting," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 448-467, March.
    3. Xi Chen & Zachary Owen & Clark Pixton & David Simchi-Levi, 2022. "A Statistical Learning Approach to Personalization in Revenue Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 1923-1937, March.
    4. Kasper Roszbach, 2004. "Bank Lending Policy, Credit Scoring, and the Survival of Loans," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 946-958, November.
    5. J. M. Liittschwager & C. Wang, 1978. "Integer Programming Solution of a Classification Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(14), pages 1515-1525, October.
    6. Jose Blanchet & Karthyek Murthy, 2019. "Quantifying Distributional Model Risk via Optimal Transport," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 565-600, May.
    7. Viet Anh Nguyen & Daniel Kuhn & Peyman Mohajerin Esfahani, 2022. "Distributionally Robust Inverse Covariance Estimation: The Wasserstein Shrinkage Estimator," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(1), pages 490-515, January.
    8. Velibor V. Mišić & Georgia Perakis, 2020. "Data Analytics in Operations Management: A Review," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 158-169, January.
    9. Jacobson, Tor & Roszbach, Kasper, 2003. "Bank lending policy, credit scoring and value-at-risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 615-633, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mocetti, Sauro & Viviano, Eliana, 2017. "Looking behind mortgage delinquencies," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 53-63.
    2. Roman Bohdan & Elizabeth Tipton & Dean Kiefer & Arsen Djatej, 2014. "The Case of Minority Small Business Owners: Empirical Evidence of Problems in Loan Financing," International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies, Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 3(3), pages 01-13, July.
    3. Erol Muzir, 2013. "Impact of Placement Choices and Governance Issues on Credit Risk in Banking: Nonparametric Evidence from an Emerging Market," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 3(4), pages 1-6, August.
    4. Lkhagvadorj Munkhdalai & Tsendsuren Munkhdalai & Oyun-Erdene Namsrai & Jong Yun Lee & Keun Ho Ryu, 2019. "An Empirical Comparison of Machine-Learning Methods on Bank Client Credit Assessments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Galema, Rients, 2020. "Credit rationing in P2P lending to SMEs: Do lender-borrower relationships matter?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    6. Giorgio Di Pietro & Andrea Cutillo, 2006. "Does Attending a Catholic School Make a Difference? Evidence From Italy," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 193-234, July.
    7. Chen, Xiao & Huang, Bihong & Ye, Dezhu, 2020. "Gender gap in peer-to-peer lending: Evidence from China," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    8. Elisa Ughetto & Andrea Vezzulli, 2011. "What role can mutual guarantee consortia play for financing innovation? A firm-level study for Italy," International Journal of Banking, Accounting and Finance, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(4), pages 294-319.
    9. Y Kim & S Y Sohn, 2007. "Technology scoring model considering rejected applicants and effect of reject inference," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(10), pages 1341-1347, October.
    10. Juan Laborda & Seyong Ryoo, 2021. "Feature Selection in a Credit Scoring Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Mohammad Zhalechian & Esmaeil Keyvanshokooh & Cong Shi & Mark P. Van Oyen, 2022. "Online Resource Allocation with Personalized Learning," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(4), pages 2138-2161, July.
    12. Agata M. Lozinskaia & Evgeniy M. Ozhegov & Alexander M. Karminsky, 2016. "Discontinuity in Relative Credit Losses: Evidence from Defaults on Government-Insured Residential Mortgages," HSE Working papers WP BRP 55/FE/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    13. Nian Si & Fan Zhang & Zhengyuan Zhou & Jose Blanchet, 2023. "Distributionally Robust Batch Contextual Bandits," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(10), pages 5772-5793, October.
    14. Fernando A. F. Ferreira & Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė & Edmundas K. Zavadskas & Marjan S. Jalali & Sandra M. J. Catarino, 2019. "A Judgment-Based Risk Assessment Framework for Consumer Loans," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 7-33, January.
    15. Lobna Abid & Afif Masmoudi & Sonia Zouari-Ghorbel, 2018. "The Consumer Loan’s Payment Default Predictive Model: an Application of the Logistic Regression and the Discriminant Analysis in a Tunisian Commercial Bank," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(3), pages 948-962, September.
    16. Julian Senoner & Bernhard Kratzwald & Milan Kuzmanovic & Torbjørn H. Netland & Stefan Feuerriegel, 2023. "Addressing distributional shifts in operations management: The case of order fulfillment in customized production," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(10), pages 3022-3042, October.
    17. Jorge Mota & António Carrizo Moreira & Cristóvão Brandão, 2018. "Determinants of microcredit repayment in Portugal: analysis of borrowers, loans and business projects," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 17(3), pages 141-171, November.
    18. Thi Mai Luong, 2020. "Selection Effects of Lender and Borrower Choices on Risk Measurement, Management and Prudential Regulation," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 3-2020, January-A.
    19. Lei Lu & Jianxing Wei & Weixing Wu & Yi Zhou, 2023. "Pricing strategies in BigTech lending: Evidence from China," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 52(2), pages 333-374, June.
    20. Jessica Holmes & Jonathan Isham & Jessica Wasilewski, 2005. "Overcoming Information Asymmetries in Low‐Income Lending: Lessons from the “Working Wheels” Program," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(2), pages 329-351, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:26:y:2024:i:4:p:1567-1585. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.