FairFLRep: Fairness-Aware Fault Localization and Repair of Deep Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are being utilized in various aspects of our daily lives, including high-stakes decision-making applications that impact individuals. However, these systems reflect and amplify bias from the data used during training and testing, potentially resulting in biased behavior and inaccurate decisions, for instance, having different misclassification rates between white and black sub-populations. However, effectively and efficiently identifying and correcting biased behavior in DNNs is a challenge. This article introduces FairFLRep , an automated fairness-aware fault localization and repair technique that identifies and corrects potentially bias-inducing neurons in DNN classifiers. FairFLRep focuses on adjusting neuron weights associated with sensitive attributes, such as race or gender, that contribute to unfair decisions. By analyzing the input–output relationships within the network, FairFLRep corrects neurons responsible for disparities in predictive quality parity. We evaluate FairFLRep on four image classification datasets using two DNN classifiers, and four tabular datasets with a DNN model. The results show that FairFLRep consistently outperforms existing methods in improving fairness while preserving accuracy. An ablation study confirms the importance of considering fairness during both fault localization and repair stages. Our findings also show that FairFLRep is more efficient than the baseline approaches in repairing the network.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".