MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Entity Matching with AUC-Based Fairness

2022· article· en· W4318187137 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMatching (statistics)StatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research on fair machine learning (ML) has been growing due to the high demand for unbiased and fair ML models for objective decision-making. Most of this research has been focused on training and tuning the ML model, and less effort has been made to study biases in the processes that clean and prepare data for these models. This paper studies fairness in entity matching (EM), a.k.a. record matching and entity resolution, a primary task in a data cleaning pipeline that can significantly impact ML models’ performance. We introduce a new metric for measuring bias in EM based on Area Under the Curve (AUC) and the risk of record matching between and within subpopulations. We use this metric and real-world data to show biases in a state-of-the-art EM technique. We introduce a debiasing algorithm based on data augmentation (DA) to mitigate bias and conduct experiments to show the algorithm’s effectiveness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0170.008
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.666
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it