Revisiting (Un)Fairness in Recourse by Minimizing Worst-Case Social Burden

Fuente: arXiv
Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barrainkua, Ainhize, De Toni, Giovanni, Lozano, Jose Antonio, Quadrianto, Novi
Formato: Preprint
Publicado: 2025
Materias:
Acceso en línea:
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1866917087895617536
author Barrainkua, Ainhize
De Toni, Giovanni
Lozano, Jose Antonio
Quadrianto, Novi
author_facet Barrainkua, Ainhize
De Toni, Giovanni
Lozano, Jose Antonio
Quadrianto, Novi
contents Machine learning based predictions are increasingly used in sensitive decision-making applications that directly affect our lives. This has led to extensive research into ensuring the fairness of classifiers. Beyond just fair classification, emerging legislation now mandates that when a classifier delivers a negative decision, it must also offer actionable steps an individual can take to reverse that outcome. This concept is known as algorithmic recourse. Nevertheless, many researchers have expressed concerns about the fairness guarantees within the recourse process itself. In this work, we provide a holistic theoretical characterization of unfairness in algorithmic recourse, formally linking fairness guarantees in recourse and classification, and highlighting limitations of the standard equal cost paradigm. We then introduce a novel fairness framework based on social burden, along with a practical algorithm (MISOB), broadly applicable under real-world conditions. Empirical results on real-world datasets show that MISOB reduces the social burden across all groups without compromising overall classifier accuracy.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_04128
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Revisiting (Un)Fairness in Recourse by Minimizing Worst-Case Social Burden
Barrainkua, Ainhize
De Toni, Giovanni
Lozano, Jose Antonio
Quadrianto, Novi
Machine Learning
Computers and Society
Machine learning based predictions are increasingly used in sensitive decision-making applications that directly affect our lives. This has led to extensive research into ensuring the fairness of classifiers. Beyond just fair classification, emerging legislation now mandates that when a classifier delivers a negative decision, it must also offer actionable steps an individual can take to reverse that outcome. This concept is known as algorithmic recourse. Nevertheless, many researchers have expressed concerns about the fairness guarantees within the recourse process itself. In this work, we provide a holistic theoretical characterization of unfairness in algorithmic recourse, formally linking fairness guarantees in recourse and classification, and highlighting limitations of the standard equal cost paradigm. We then introduce a novel fairness framework based on social burden, along with a practical algorithm (MISOB), broadly applicable under real-world conditions. Empirical results on real-world datasets show that MISOB reduces the social burden across all groups without compromising overall classifier accuracy.
title Revisiting (Un)Fairness in Recourse by Minimizing Worst-Case Social Burden
topic Machine Learning
Computers and Society
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.04128