Decision-making processes increasingly rely on the use of algorithms. Yet, algorithms' predictive ability frequently exhibit systematic variation across subgroups of the population. While both fairness and accuracy are desirable properties of an algorithm, they often come at the cost of one another. What should a fairness-minded policymaker do then, when confronted with finite data? In this paper, we provide a consistent estimator for a theoretical fairness-accuracy frontier put forward by Liang, Lu and Mu (2023) and propose inference methods to test hypotheses that have received much attention in the fairness literature, such as (i) whether fully excluding a covariate from use in training the algorithm is optimal and (ii) whether there are less discriminatory alternatives to an existing algorithm. We also provide an estimator for the distance between a given algorithm and the fairest point on the frontier, and characterize its asymptotic distribution. We leverage the fact that the fairness-accuracy frontier is part of the boundary of a convex set that can be fully represented by its support function. We show that the estimated support function converges to a tight Gaussian process as the sample size increases, and then express policy-relevant hypotheses as restrictions on the support function to construct valid test statistics.

通过提供一致的估计器和推理方法，本文研究了决策过程中算法的公平性和准确性之间的权衡，还提出了是否排除算法训练中的某些协变量以及是否存在非歧视性替代算法等方面的假设。

算法公平性-准确性边界的推断